Global disparities in the treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from an international online survey study

Objectives We aimed to explore current practice and interregional differences in the treatment of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs). We triangulated these observations considering countries' gross national income (GNI), disease subtypes, and symptoms using patient-reported information. Methods A cross-sectional ancillary analysis of the 'COVID-19 vaccination in auto-immune disease' (COVAD) e-survey containing demographic characteristics, IIM subtypes (DM, PM, IBM, anti-synthetase syndrome [ASSD], immune-mediated necrotizing myopathy [IMNM], overlap myopathies [OM]), current symptoms (surrogate for organ involvement) and treatments (corticosteroids [CS], immunomodulators [IM], i.e. antimalarials, immunosuppressants [IS], IVIG, biologic treatments and targeted-synthetic small molecules). Treatments were presented descriptively according to continents, GNI, IIM and organ involvement, and associated factors were analysed using multivariable binary logistic regressions. Results Of 18 851 respondents from 94 countries, 1418 with IIM were analysed (age 61 years, 62.5% females). DM (32.4%), IBM (24.5%) and OM (15.8%) were the most common subtypes. Treatment categories included IS (49.4%), CS (38.5%), IM (13.8%) and IVIG (9.4%). Notably, treatments varied across regions, GNI categories (IS mostly used in higher-middle income, IM in lower-middle income, IVIG and biologics largely limited to high-income countries), IIM subtypes (IS and CS associated with ASSD, IM with OM and DM, IVIG with IMNM, and biologic treatments with OM and ASSD) and disease manifestations (IS and CS with dyspnoea). Most inter-regional treatment disparities persisted after multivariable analysis. Conclusion We identified marked regional treatment disparities in a global cohort of IIM. These observations highlight the need for international consensus-driven management guidelines considering patient-centred care and available resources

COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy and breastfeeding in women with autoimmune diseases: results from the COVAD study

Objectives: We investigated COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) in the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. Methods: Delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related adverse events (AE), disease flares (DF), and AID-related treatment modifications were analyzed upon diagnosis of AID versus healthy controls (HC) and the pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of at least one dose of vaccine. Results: Among the 9201 participants to the self-administered online survey, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding patients with AID were identified, of whom the majority had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (100% and 96.2%, respectively). AE were reported significantly more frequently in pregnant than in non-pregnant patients (overall AE 45% vs 26%, p= 0.01; minor AE 40% vs 25.9%, p= 0.03; major AE 17.5% vs 4.6%, p< 0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC with respect to AE. Post-vaccination DF were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18.3% of age- and disease-matched non-pregnant and non-breastfeeding patients (n = 262). All pregnant/breastfeeding patients who experienced a DF were managed with glucocorticoids; 28.6% and 20% of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressants, respectively. Conclusion: This study provides reassuring insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccines administered to women with AID during the gestational and post-partum periods, helping overcome hesitant attitudes, as the benefits for the mother and the fetus by passive immunization appear to outweigh potential risks