Adalimumab and ABP 501 in the Treatment of a Large Cohort of Patients with Inflammatory Arthritis: A Real Life Retrospective Analysis

The recent introduction of ABP 501, an adalimumab biosimilar, in the treatment of rheumatic diseases was supported by a comprehensive comparability exercise with its originator. On the other hand, observational studies comparing adalimumab and ABP 501 in inflammatory arthritis are still lacking. The main aim of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes of the treatment with adalimumab, both the originator and ABP 501, in a large cohort of patients affected by autoimmune arthritis in a real life setting. We retrospectively analysed the baseline characteristics and the retention rate in a cohort of patients who received at least a course of adalimumab (originator or ABP 501) from January 2003 to December 2020. We stratified the study population according to adalimumab use: naive to original (oADA), naive to ABP 501 (bADA) and switched from original to ABP 501 (sADA). The oADA, bADA and sADA groups included, respectively, 724, 129 and 193 patients. In each group, the majority of patients had a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. The total observation period was 9805.6 patient-months. The 18-month retentions rate in oADA, bADA and sADA was, respectively, 81.5%, 84.0% and 88.0% (p > 0.05). The factors influencing the adalimumab retention rate were an axial spondylarthritis diagnosis (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.70; p = 0.04), switch from oADA to ABP 501 (HR 0.53; p = 0.02) and year of prescription (HR 1.04; p = 0.04). In this retrospective study, patients naive to the adalimumab originator and its biosimilar ABP 501 showed the same retention rate. Patients switching from the originator to biosimilar had a higher retention rate, even though not statistically significant, when compared to naive

Carbon Tax acceptability: A comparative experimental analysis

Greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions are rising worldwide. Despite the efforts made both at the national and at the international level, new policies are needed in order to effectively reduce the GHG emissions. Command-and-control policies have been frequently adopted, but proved not to suffice to reverse the phenomenon. A carbon tax could make the case, but it is seldom implemented due to its assumed political unpopularity. A contingent valuation experiment is performed in USA and in Italy to analyze this issue. The results show that the policy acceptability is very high and that the median WTP ranges between a minimum of $161 and a maximum of$246, and varies according to the tax revenue use, the respondents\u2019 nationality, the respondents\u2019 beliefs and knowledge about climate change, and some sociodemographic characteristics. Policy implications of the results obtained are further described in the paper

Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Bike-Sharing: A Literature Review

Bike-sharing is recognized as a fast and efficient transport solution in cities, with zero emissions, convenience, speed of movement for short distances and beneficial effects on users’ health. In recent years, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, its use has been rather heterogeneous across countries and significant differences have emerged from empirical studies. However, there has been no systematic review of the empirical studies focused on the impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the use of bike-sharing. This article aims to review all of the papers that have been published on this topic since the outbreak of the pandemic. In this analysis, we consider several elements, such as the impacts of the pandemic on actual and potential ridership, on the demand for bike-sharing compared to other public transport means, and on commuting and non-commuting trips. We also focus on the factors that have had an impact on the change in bike-sharing usage and the related policy and operational implications that have emerged from the literature. Finally, we highlight the gaps in the literature that require further investigation

Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Bike-Sharing: A Literature Review

Bike-sharing is recognized as a fast and efficient transport solution in cities, with zero emissions, convenience, speed of movement for short distances and beneficial effects on users’ health. In recent years, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, its use has been rather heterogeneous across countries and significant differences have emerged from empirical studies. However, there has been no systematic review of the empirical studies focused on the impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the use of bike-sharing. This article aims to review all of the papers that have been published on this topic since the outbreak of the pandemic. In this analysis, we consider several elements, such as the impacts of the pandemic on actual and potential ridership, on the demand for bike-sharing compared to other public transport means, and on commuting and non-commuting trips. We also focus on the factors that have had an impact on the change in bike-sharing usage and the related policy and operational implications that have emerged from the literature. Finally, we highlight the gaps in the literature that require further investigation

Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Bike-Sharing: A Literature Review

Bike-sharing is recognized as a fast and efficient transport solution in cities, with zero emissions, convenience, speed of movement for short distances and beneficial effects on users’ health. In recent years, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, its use has been rather heterogeneous across countries and significant differences have emerged from empirical studies. However, there has been no systematic review of the empirical studies focused on the impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the use of bike-sharing. This article aims to review all of the papers that have been published on this topic since the outbreak of the pandemic. In this analysis, we consider several elements, such as the impacts of the pandemic on actual and potential ridership, on the demand for bike-sharing compared to other public transport means, and on commuting and non-commuting trips. We also focus on the factors that have had an impact on the change in bike-sharing usage and the related policy and operational implications that have emerged from the literature. Finally, we highlight the gaps in the literature that require further investigation

A New Case of DRESS Syndrome Induced by Sulfasalazine and Triggered by Amoxicillin

Drug Rash Eosinophilia Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) syndrome is a systemic hypersensitivity reaction characterized by exfoliative dermatitis and maculopapular rash, lymphadenopathy, fever, eosinophilia, leukocytosis, and involvement of internal organs as liver, lung, heart, and kidney; the disorder starts within 2–6 weeks after taking a drug with an incidence that ranges from 1/1000 to 1/10000 exposures. Fatal cases are reported. The exact pathogenesis of DRESS syndrome is not completely understood, while it is reported that amoxicillin could trigger it in patients who are taking allopurinol, sulfasalazine, NSAIDs, carbamazepine, strontium ranelate, lisinopril, lansoprazole, and minocycline. Amoxicillin could act directly, inducing the reactivation of a viral infection (HHV 6 and EBV) with symptoms similar to DRESS syndrome or by reducing the patients’ ability to detoxify the body from substances chronically taken. We describe a case of a patient admitted to our hospital for a DRESS syndrome flared after amoxicilline intake during treatment with sulfasalazine; this combination can activate severe reactions often with an insidious onset that can mimic an infectious disease

Efficacy of Corticosteroids Alone in the Eradication of Factor VIII Inhibitor in an Old Female with Idiopathic Acquired Haemophilia A: Description of a Case

Acquired haemophilia A (AHA) is a rare and serious disorder mainly affecting elderly patients. It is caused by the production of autoantibodies directed against coagulation factors; patients present with spontaneous bleeding, potentially fatal, in the absence of familial or personal history. Autoimmune disorders, infections, solid and hematologic tumors, and drugs are predisposing factors, but up to 50 percent of cases remain unexplained. The diagnosis of AHA is confirmed by specific laboratory tests; and the therapy is a clinical challenge, due to the fact that older patients are often affected by comorbidities. By passing agents may be used when persistent bleeding or haemodynamic instability is observed; corticosteroids, alone or with immunosuppressive therapy, are necessary to inhibit the production of the autoantibodies. We describe a case in which steroids in monotherapy successfully, safely, and persistently inhibited the production of anti-Factor VIII antibodies, in an old patient admitted after rheumatologic consult

Association between severity of COVID-19 respiratory disease and risk of obstructive sleep apnea

Objectives: The purpose of this observational retrospective study was to evaluate, in patients with a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection, the association between the severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) respiratory illness and the risk of infected patients to develop obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Methods: Ninety-six patients with confirmed COVID-19 infection were enrolled in the study. The STOP-BANG questionnaire to investigate the risk of the OSA syndrome was filled in by the patients at admission. The enrolled patients were divided into 2 groups according to the respiratory disease: group 1 (72 patients), hospitalized patients undergoing conventional oxygen therapy; group 2 (24 patients), patients requiring enhanced respiratory support. STOP-BANG results of these 2 groups were compared to observe whether patients with high OSA risk more frequently presented a severe form of COVID-19. Results: 41.6% of the patients in group 2 had a STOP-BANG score between 5 and 8 (high risk of having apnea); in contrast, 20.8% of the patients in group 1 had a STOP-BANG score between 5 and 8, with a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups (P ¼ .05). A complementary trend was observed regarding the proportion of patients in the range 0 to 2, which classifies patients at a low risk of OSA (48.6% vs 20.8% for groups 1 and 2, P ¼ .01). Conclusions: According to our data, the chances of having a severe case of COVID-19 should be considered in patients at high risk of OSA. Current Knowledge/Study Rationale: Emerging research suggests that OSA could represent a potentially important risk factor for the severe forms of COVID-19. The purpose of this observational retrospective study was to evaluate the potential association between OSA and the severity of COVID-19 disease. Study Impact: According to our data, the likelihood of contracting a severe form of COVID-19 disease should be considered in patients at high risk of OSA

Efficacy and Drug Survival after Switching from Etanercept to the Biosimilar SB4: A Real-Life Long-Term Study

We evaluated the 3-year drug survival and efficacy of the biosimilar SB4/Benepali in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients, previously treated with etanercept (ETA). Drug survival rate was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazard models were developed to examine predictors of SB4 discontinuation. 236 patients (120 RA, 80 PsA and 36 AS), aged 60.7 ± 13.8 years and with an ETA duration of 4.1 ± 3.4 years were included. The 3-year retention rate for SB4 was 94.4%, 88% and 86% in AS, RA and PsA patients, respectively, with no difference between groups. Patients without comorbid disease had higher retention rates vs. patients with comorbid disease (90% vs. 60%, p < 0.0001). Disease activity, as measured by DAS28, DAPSA and BASDAI remained stable over the 3 years. Comorbid disease (hazard ratio; HR: 4.06, p < 0.0001) and HAQ at baseline (HR: 2.42, p = 0.0024) significantly increased the risk of SB4 discontinuation, while previous ETA duration was negatively associated with SB4 discontinuation (HR: 0.97, p = 0.0064). Forty-one (17.4%) patients left the study due to the interruption of the SB4 treatment, 31 (75.6%) discontinued due to inefficacy and 10 (24.4%) due to adverse events. This real-life study confirms the similar efficacy profile of ETA with long-term retention and a good safety profile in inflammatory arthritis patients