Gene-expression analysis of adult-onset Still’s disease and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis is consistent with a continuum of a single disease entity

Background: Adult-onset Still’s disease (AOSD), a rare autoinflammatory disorder, resembles systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SJIA). The superimposable systemic clinical features of AOSD and SJIA suggest both clinical phenotypes represent the same disease continuum with different ages of onset. To further characterize the similarity between AOSD and SJIA at the molecular level, 2 previously identified response gene sets in SJIA were used to investigate how genes that respond to interleukin (IL)-1β inhibition with canakinumab in SJIA patients behave in AOSD patients with active disease prior to IL-1β targeting therapy, relative to healthy subjects. Findings: All genes downregulated in SJIA patients following canakinumab treatment were upregulated in most patients with active AOSD prior to canakinumab treatment, relative to healthy subjects. A few patients with milder AOSD had expectedly gene-expression patterns that resembled those in healthy subjects. Comparison of the gene-expression patterns with neutrophil counts showed a correlation between elevated neutrophil numbers and upregulation of canakinumab-responsive genes. Correspondingly, most genes upregulated following canakinumab treatment in patients with SJIA patients were downregulated in the majority of AOSD patients. Conclusions: These results further support the concept of a Still’s disease continuum that includes both a pediatric/juvenile onset (SJIA) and adult onset (AOSD) form

Increased expression of costimulatory markers CD134 and CD80 on interleukin-17 producing T cells in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus

Introduction: There is growing evidence that interleukin 17 (IL-17) producing T cells are involved in the pathogenesis of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Previous studies showed that increased percentages of T-cell subsets expressing the costimulatory molecules CD80 and CD134 are associated with disease activity and renal involvement in SLE. The aim of this study was to investigate the distribution and phenotypical characteristics of IL-17 producing T-cells in SLE, in particular in patients with lupus nephritis, with emphasis on the expression of CD80 and CD134. Methods: Thirty-four patients (3 male, 31 female, mean age 41 +/- 15 years) fulfilling at least four of the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) revised criteria for the diagnosis of SLE and 24 healthy controls were enrolled. T-cells from the peripheral blood were analysed by fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) for their expression levels of CD80, CD134 and CCR6. In vitro stimulated CD3(+)IL17(+) cells were also investigated for the expression of these costimulatory markers. Finally, renal biopsies from SLE patients were evaluated for the presence of CD134 expressing T-cells. Results: Percentages of IL-17 expressing T-cells were significantly increased in patients with active disease as compared to healthy controls (1.46 +/- 0.58% versus 0.93 +/- 0.30%, P = 0.007). The percentage of IL-17 producing T-cells was correlated with disease activity as assessed by systemic lupus erythematosus disease activity index (SLEDAI) (r = 0.53, P = 0.003). In patients, most of the IL-17 producing T-cells were confined to the CCR6(+) T-cell subset (80 +/- 13%). Expression of CD80 and CD134 on the IL-17 producing T-cell subset was higher in SLE than in healthy controls (HC) (CD134: 71.78 +/- 14.51% versus 51.45 +/- 16.58%, P = 0.002; CD80: 25.5 +/- 14.99% versus 14.99 +/- 5.74%, P = 0.02). Also, patients with lupus nephritis expressed higher levels of CD134(+) on CD3(+)IL-17(+) cells as compared to HC (72.69 +/- 11.54% versus 51.45 +/- 16.58%, P = 0.006). Furthermore, renal biopsies of lupus nephritis patients showed infiltration of CD134(+) T cells. Conclusions: Percentages of IL-17 expressing T-cells correlate with disease activity. Further, these cells show increased expression of costimulatory markers such as CD134 and CD80. The presence of CD134(+) T-cells in renal biopsies of lupus nephritis patients suggest that these cells migrate to the kidney and might contribute to inflammatory processes through IL-17 secretion

Canakinumab for Treatment of Adult-Onset Still's Disease to Achieve Reduction of Arthritic Manifestation (CONSIDER): phase II, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, investigator-initiated trial

Background: Inhibition of interleukin (IL)-1 represents a promising treatment option in adult-onset Still's disease (AOSD). Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of canakinumab in patients with AOSD and active joint involvement by means of a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Methods Patients with AOSD and active joint involvement (tender and swollen joint counts of >= 4 each) were treated with canakinumab (4 mg/kg, maximum 300 mg subcutaneous every 4 weeks) or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a clinically relevant reduction in disease activity at week 12 as determined by the change in disease activity score (Delta DAS28>1.2). Results At enrolment, patients had high active disease with a mean DAS28(ESR) of 5.4 in the canakinumab and 5.3 in the placebo group, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, 12 patients (67%) in the canakinumab group and 7 patients (41%) in the placebo group fulfilled the primary outcome criterion (p=0.18). In the per-protocol analysis, significantly higher American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 30% (61% vs 20%, p=0.033), ACR 50% (50% vs 6.7%, p=0.009) and ACR 70% (28% vs 0%, p=0.049) response rates were observed in the canakinumab group compared with the placebo group. Two patients in the canakinumab group experienced a serious adverse event. Conclusion Although the study was terminated prematurely and the primary endpoint was not achieved, treatment with canakinumab led to an improvement of several outcome measures in AOSD. The overall safety findings were consistent with the known profile of canakinumab. Thus, our data support indication for IL-1 inhibition with canakinumab in AOSD

National registry for patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) infected with SARS-CoV-2 in Germany (ReCoVery): a valuable mean to gain rapid and reliable knowledge of the clinical course of SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with IRD

Objectives: Patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) may be at risk to develop a severe course of COVID-19. The influence of immunomodulating drugs on the course of COVID-19 is unknown. To gather knowledge about SARS-CoV-2 infections in patients with IRD, we established a registry shortly after the beginning of the pandemic in Germany. Methods Using an online questionnaire (www.COVID19-rheuma.de.), a nationwide database was launched on 30 March 2020, with appropriate ethical and data protection approval to collect data of patients with IRD infected with SARS-CoV-2. In this registry, key clinical and epidemiological parameters-for example, diagnosis of IRD, antirheumatic therapies, comorbidities and course of the infection-are documented. Results Until 25 April 2020, data from 104 patients with IRD infected with SARS-CoV-2 were reported (40 males;63 females;1 diverse). Most of them (45%) were diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, 59% had one or more comorbidities and 42% were treated with biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs. Hospitalisation was reported in 32% of the patients. Two-thirds of the patients already recovered. Unfortunately, 6 patients had a fatal course. Conclusions: In a short time, a national registry for SARS-CoV2-infected patients with IRD was established. Within 4 weeks, 104 cases were documented. The registry enables to generate data rapidly in this emerging situation and to gain a better understanding of the course of SARS-CoV2-infection in patients with IRD, with a distinct focus on their immunomodulatory therapies. This knowledge is valuable for timely information of physicians and patients with IRD, and shall also serve for the development of guidance for the management of patients with IRD during this pandemic

Synovitis and bone inflammation in early rheumatoid arthritis: high-resolution multi-pinhole SPECT versus MRI

PURPOSEWe aimed to assess the relationship between bone inflammation in multi-pinhole single-photon emission computed tomography (MPH-SPECT) and synovitis detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in early rheumatoid arthritis patients. MATERIALS AND METHODSMPH-SPECT with technetium dicarboxypropanedisphosphonate (Tc-99mDPD) and 3 Tesla MRI were performed in 10 early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Eighty finger joint sites were assessed for increased osteoblastic activity using visual and region-of-interest (ROI) analysis. Presence of joint inflammation in MRI was investigated using the subscores of the rheumatoid arthritis MRI score. RESULTSTc-99mDPD uptake was increased in 38 (47.5%) and 22 (27.5%) joint sites as determined by visual and ROI analysis, respectively. A total of 32 (84.2%) sites with increased bone metabolism showed a normal MRI bone signal. The MPHSPECT uptake ratio was elevated only in the subgroup with severe synovitis (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONIn early rheumatoid arthritis, molecular imaging with MPHSPECT detects higher rates of inflammatory bone involvement compared to MRI. Our preliminary data suggest that osteitis is related to severe synovitis

Model curriculum of the German society for Rheumatology for advanced training in the discipline internal medicine and rheumatology. English version

With the implementation of the revision of the model training regulations for German physicians (Musterweiterbildungsverordnung, MWBO) in 2018, the area of each field in internal medicine was redefined and a restructuring of the training period for specialists in internal medicine and rheumatology took place [2]. The minimum training time requires 72 months, divided into two parts of 36 months each, which include both the common contents of the training as a specialist in internal medicine (“basic training”) as well as the specific contents of the specialist training in internal medicine and rheumatology. The basic training period in “internal medicine” requires acquisition of at least two specialist competences which do not belong to the specializing field. This training consists of 24 months and is complemented by 6 months of training in both an emergency department and an intensive care unit. The specialized training period in internal medicine and rheumatology also extends over 36 months, of which at least 24 months are completed in inpatient rheumatologic care as defined by the MWBO [2]. Exemptions from this regulation were introduced by individual State Medical Chambers (Landesärztekammern) to allow for a longer period of specialized training in outpatient rheumatologic care. Based on the MWBO of 2018, a model curriculum was developed by the Commission for Education and Training of the German Society of Rheumatology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie, DGRh) on behalf of the board of the DGRh with regard to core competences in specialized training in internal medicine and rheumatology. This model curriculum focuses on advanced training competences which should be acquired within the 36 months of specialized training in internal medicine and rheumatology and does not include competences relevant to the general part of internal medicine training (basic training). In this review article, the model curriculum of the DGRh for specialized training in internal medicine and rheumatology is presented

Rheumatologische Weiterbildungsstellen in Deutschland

Hintergrund In den nächsten Jahren gehen viele Haus- bzw. Fachärzt:innen in den Ruhestand. Wie in anderen Disziplinen stellt sich in der Rheumatologie die Frage, ob ausreichend Weiterbildungsstellen zur Verfügung stehen, um das Versorgungsangebot bedarfsgerecht aufrechterhalten bzw. ausweiten zu können. Daher hat die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Rheumatologie (DGRh) ihre Kommission Fort- und Weiterbildung beauftragt, die aktuell zur Verfügung stehenden Weiterbildungsmöglichkeiten in Deutschland zu überprüfen. Ziel dieser Arbeit ist die Erfassung der Weiterbildungskapazität zur Fachärztin bzw. zum Facharzt für Innere Medizin und Rheumatologie. Methodik Im Rahmen dieser Studie erfolgte die Erhebung der Weiterbildungsbefugten, deren Tätigkeitsort und die Dauer von deren Weiterbildungsbefugnis über die Homepages der 17 Landesärztekammern. Basierend auf diesen Daten erfolgte dann eine deutschlandweite Umfrage zu den Weiterbildungsstellen. Ergebnisse Die Weiterbildung zum/zur Facharzt/Fachärztin für Rheumatologie erfolgte in Deutschland im Jahr 2021 an 229 Weiterbildungsorten. Dabei standen von 187 Weiterbildungsorten nähere Daten für eine Analyse zur Verfügung (81,7 %). Die Weiterbildungsorte verteilten sich dabei auf Kliniken (52,4 %) und Niederlassungen (47,6 %), wobei der Großteil (81,8 %) der insgesamt 478,4 Weiterbildungsstellen (Klinik: 391,4 und Niederlassung: 87) im Krankenhausbereich lag. Insgesamt waren zum Erhebungszeitpunkt 17,2 % aller Weiterbildungsstellen (Klinik: 11,4 % und Niederlassung: 43,1 %) nicht besetzt. Diskussion Die Studie zeigt, dass die meisten Weiterbildungsstellen in klinischen Einrichtungen vorhanden sind. Demgegenüber gibt es im niedergelassenen Bereich vergleichsweise wenige Weiterbildungsstellen, die zudem zur Hälfte nicht besetzt sind. Für eine optimale Nutzung bereits bestehender Weiterbildungskapazitäten müssen sektorübergreifende Weiterbildungskonzepte entwickelt und v. a. muss auch eine eigenständige Vergütung des Weiterbildungsaufwandes etabliert werden. In diesem Kontext muss eine gute rheumatologische Versorgung in ganz Deutschland dauerhaft gewährleistet sein, um den betroffenen ca. 2 Mio. Patienten mit entzündlich rheumatischen Erkrankung gerecht werden zu können

Safety and clinical outcomes of rituximab therapy in patients with different autoimmune diseases: experience from a national registry (GRAID)

Introduction: Evidence from a number of open-label, uncontrolled studies has suggested that rituximab may benefit patients with autoimmune diseases who are refractory to standard-of-care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and clinical outcomes of rituximab in several standard-of-care-refractory autoimmune diseases (within rheumatology, nephrology, dermatology and neurology) other than rheumatoid arthritis or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in a real-life clinical setting. Methods: Patients who received rituximab having shown an inadequate response to standard-of-care had their safety and clinical outcomes data retrospectively analysed as part of the German Registry of Autoimmune Diseases. The main outcome measures were safety and clinical response, as judged at the discretion of the investigators. Results: A total of 370 patients (299 patient-years) with various autoimmune diseases (23.0% with systemic lupus erythematosus, 15.7% antineutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated granulomatous vasculitides, 15.1% multiple sclerosis and 10.0% pemphigus) from 42 centres received a mean dose of 2,440 mg of rituximab over a median (range) of 194 (180 to 1,407) days. The overall rate of serious infections was 5.3 per 100 patient-years during rituximab therapy. Opportunistic infections were infrequent across the whole study population, and mostly occurred in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. There were 11 deaths (3.0% of patients) after rituximab treatment (mean 11.6 months after first infusion, range 0.8 to 31.3 months), with most of the deaths caused by infections. Overall (n = 293), 13.3% of patients showed no response, 45.1% showed a partial response and 41.6% showed a complete response. Responses were also reflected by reduced use of glucocorticoids and various immunosuppressives during rituximab therapy and follow-up compared with before rituximab. Rituximab generally had a positive effect on patient well-being (physician's visual analogue scale; mean improvement from baseline of 12.1 mm). Conclusions: Data from this registry indicate that rituximab is a commonly employed, well-tolerated therapy with potential beneficial effects in standard of care-refractory autoimmune diseases, and support the results from other open-label, uncontrolled studies

Associations of baseline use of biologic or targeted synthetic DMARDs with COVID-19 severity in rheumatoid arthritis : Results from the COVID-19 Global Rheumatology Alliance physician registry

Funding Information: Competing interests JAS is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Funding Information: Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers K23 AR069688, R03 AR075886, L30 AR066953, P30 AR070253 and P30 AR072577), the Rheumatology Research Foundation (K Supplement Award and R Bridge Award), the Brigham Research Institute, and the R Bruce and Joan M Mickey Research Scholar Fund. JAS has received research support from Amgen and Bristol-Myers Squibb and performed consultancy for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Gilead, Inova, Janssen and Optum, unrelated to this work. ZSW reports grant support from Bristol-Myers Squibb and Principia/ Sanofi and performed consultancy for Viela Bio and MedPace, outside the submitted work. His work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health. MG is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (grant numbers K01 AR070585 and K24 AR074534; JY). KLH reports she has received speaker’s fees from AbbVie and grant income from BMS, UCB and Pfizer, all unrelated to this study. KLH is also supported by the NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre. LC has not received fees or personal grants from any laboratory, but her institute works by contract for laboratories such as, among other institutions, AbbVie Spain, Eisai, Gebro Pharma, Merck Sharp & Dohme España, Novartis Farmaceutica, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi Aventis, Astellas Pharma, Actelion Pharmaceuticals España, Grünenthal and UCB Pharma. LG reports research grants from Amgen, Galapagos, Janssen, Lilly, Pfizer, Sandoz and Sanofi; consulting fees from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Biogen, Celgene, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung Bioepis, Sanofi Aventis and UCB, all unrelated to this study. EFM reports that LPCDR received support for specific activities: grants from AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly Portugal, Sanofi, Grünenthal, MSD, Celgene, Medac, Pharma Kern and GAfPA; grants and non-financial support from Pfizer; and non-financial support from Grünenthal, outside the submitted work. AS reports grants from a consortium of 13 companies (among them AbbVie, BMS, Celltrion, Fresenius Kabi, Lilly, Mylan, Hexal, MSD, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi Aventis and UCB) supporting the German RABBIT register, and personal fees from lectures for AbbVie, MSD, Roche, BMS and Pfizer, outside the submitted work. AD-G has no disclosures relevant to this study. His work is supported by grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Rheumatology Research Foundation. KMD is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (T32-AR-007258) and the Rheumatology Research Foundation. NJP is supported by the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (T32-AR-007258). PD has received research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chugai and Pfizer, and performed consultancy for Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Lilly, Sanofi, Pfizer, Chugai, Roche and Janssen, unrelated to this work. NS is supported by the RRF Investigator Award and the American Heart Association. MFU-G reports grant support from Janssen and Pfizer. SB reports no competing interests related to this work. He reports non-branded consulting fees for AbbVie, Horizon, Novartis and Pfizer (all <$10 000). RG reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work she reports personal and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and Cornerstones, and travel assistance from Pfizer (all <$10 000). JH reports no competing interests related to this work. He is supported by grants from the Rheumatology Research Foundation and the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance. He has performed consulting for Novartis, Sobi and Biogen, all unrelated to this work (<$10 000). JL has received research funding from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. ES is a Board Member of the Canadian Arthritis Patient Alliance, a patient-run, volunteer-based organisation whose activities are largely supported by independent grants from pharmaceutical companies. PS reports no competing interests related to this work. He reports honorarium for doing social media for American College of Rheumatology journals (<$10 000). PMM has received consulting/speaker’s fees from AbbVie, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche and UCB, all unrelated to this study (all <$10 000). PMM is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) University College London Hospitals (UCLH) Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). PCR reports no competing interests related to this work. Outside of this work he reports personal consulting and/or speaking fees from AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB, and travel assistance from Roche (all <$10 000). JY reports no competing interests related to this work. Her work is supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control, and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. She has performed consulting for Eli Lilly and AstraZeneca, unrelated to this project. Publisher Copyright: © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Objective To investigate baseline use of biologic or targeted synthetic (b/ts) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and COVID-19 outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Methods We 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. Results Of 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. Conclusions People 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.publishersversionPeer reviewe

The German National Registry of Primary Immunodeficiencies (2012-2017)

Introduction: The German PID-NET registry was founded in 2009, serving as the first national registry of patients with primary immunodeficiencies (PID) in Germany. It is part of the European Society for Immunodeficiencies (ESID) registry. The primary purpose of the registry is to gather data on the epidemiology, diagnostic delay, diagnosis, and treatment of PIDs. Methods: Clinical and laboratory data was collected from 2,453 patients from 36 German PID centres in an online registry. Data was analysed with the software Stata® and Excel. Results: The minimum prevalence of PID in Germany is 2.72 per 100,000 inhabitants. Among patients aged 1–25, there was a clear predominance of males. The median age of living patients ranged between 7 and 40 years, depending on the respective PID. Predominantly antibody disorders were the most prevalent group with 57% of all 2,453 PID patients (including 728 CVID patients). A gene defect was identified in 36% of patients. Familial cases were observed in 21% of patients. The age of onset for presenting symptoms ranged from birth to late adulthood (range 0–88 years). Presenting symptoms comprised infections (74%) and immune dysregulation (22%). Ninety-three patients were diagnosed without prior clinical symptoms. Regarding the general and clinical diagnostic delay, no PID had undergone a slight decrease within the last decade. However, both, SCID and hyper IgE- syndrome showed a substantial improvement in shortening the time between onset of symptoms and genetic diagnosis. Regarding treatment, 49% of all patients received immunoglobulin G (IgG) substitution (70%—subcutaneous; 29%—intravenous; 1%—unknown). Three-hundred patients underwent at least one hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Five patients had gene therapy. Conclusion: The German PID-NET registry is a precious tool for physicians, researchers, the pharmaceutical industry, politicians, and ultimately the patients, for whom the outcomes will eventually lead to a more timely diagnosis and better treatment