Post-COVID-19 syndrome in patients with primary Sjögren's syndrome after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the frequency and characteristics of post-COVID-19 syndrome in patients with primary Sjögren’s syndrome (pSS) affected by acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: By the first week of April 2021, all centres included in the Big Data Sjögren Consortium were contacted asking for patients included in the Registry diagnosed with SARSCoV-2 infection according to the ECDC guidelines. According to the NICE definitions, symptoms related to COVID-19 were classified as acute COVID-19 (signs and symptoms for up to 4 weeks), ongoing symptomatic COVID-19 (presence of signs and symptoms from 4 to 12 weeks) and post-COVID-19 syndrome (signs and symptoms that continue for > 12 weeks not explained by an alternative diagnosis after a protocolized study). RESULTS: We identified 132 patients who were followed a mean follow-up of 137.8 days (ranging from 5 days to 388 days) after being diagnosed with COVID-19. In the last visit, 75 (57%) patients remained symptomatic: 68 (52%) remained symptomatic for more than 4 weeks fulfilling the NICE definition for ongoing symptomatic post-COVID-19, and 38 (29%) remained symptomatic for more than 12 weeks fulfilling the definition of post-COVID-19 syndrome. More than 40% of pSS patients reported the persistence of four symptoms or more, including anxiety/depression (59%), arthralgias (56%), sleep disorder (44%), fatigue (40%), anosmia (34%) and myalgias (32%). Age-sex adjusted multivariate analysis identified raised LDH levels (OR 10.36), raised CRP levels (OR 7.33), use of hydroxychloroquine (OR 3.51) and antiviral agents (OR 3.38), hospital admission (OR 8.29), mean length of hospital admission (OR 1.1) and requirement of supplemental oxygen (OR 6.94) as factors associated with a higher risk of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome. A sensitivity analysis including hospital admission in the adjusted model confirmed raised CRP levels (OR 8.6, 95% CI 1.33-104.44) and use of hydroxychloroquine (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.00-6.47) as the key independent factors associated with an enhanced risk of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that analyses the frequency and characteristics of post-COVID-19 syndrome in patients affected by a systemic autoimmune disease. We found that 57% of patients with pSS affected by COVID-19 remain symptomatic after a mean follow-up of 5 months. The risk of developing post-COVID-19 syndrome in patients who required hospitalisation was 8-times higher than in non-hospitalised patients, with baseline raised CRP levels and the use of hydroxychloroquine being independent risk factors for post-COVID-19.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Characterization and outcomes of 414 patients with primary SS who developed haematological malignancies

Objective To characterize 414 patients with primary SS who developed haematological malignancies and to analyse how the main SS- and lymphoma-related features can modify the presentation patterns and outcomes. Methods By January 2021, the Big Data Sjögren Project Consortium database included 11¿966 patients fulfilling the 2002/2016 classification criteria. Haematological malignancies diagnosed according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification were retrospectively identified. Results There were 414 patients (355 women, mean age 57¿years) with haematological malignancies (in 43, malignancy preceded at least one year the SS diagnosis). A total of 376 (91%) patients had mature B-cell malignancy, nearly half had extranodal marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT lymphoma) (n¿=¿197), followed by diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) (n¿=¿67), nodal MZL lymphoma (n¿=¿29), chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) (n¿=¿19) and follicular lymphoma (FL) (n¿=¿17). Rates of complete response, relapses and death were 80%, 34% and 13%, respectively, with a 5-year survival rate of 86.5% after a mean follow-up of 8¿years. There were significant differences in age at diagnosis (younger in MALT, older in CLL/SLL), predominant clinical presentation (glandular enlargement in MALT lymphoma, peripheral lymphadenopathy in nodal MZL and FL, constitutional symptoms in DLBCL, incidental diagnosis in CLL/SLL), therapeutic response (higher in MALT lymphoma, lower in DLBCL) and survival (better in MALT, nodal MZL and FL, worse in DLBCL). Conclusion In the largest reported study of haematological malignancies complicating primary SS, we confirm the overwhelming predominance of B-cell lymphomas, especially MALT, with the salivary glands being the primary site of involvement. This highly-specific histopathological scenario is linked with the overall good prognosis with a 5-year survival rate of nearly 90%.Peer ReviewedPostprint (published version

Increase in Il-31 Serum Levels Is Associated with Reduced Structural Damage in Early Axial Spondyloarthritis

In spondyloarthritis, little is known about the relation between circulating cytokines and patient phenotype. We have quantified serum levels of T helper type 1 cell (Th1), Th2 and Th17 cytokines in patients with recent-onset axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) from the DESIR cohort, a prospective, multicenter French cohort consisting of 708 patients with recent-onset inflammatory back pain (duration >3 months but <3 years) suggestive of AxSpA. Serum levels of Th1, Th2, and Th17 cytokines were assessed at baseline in patients from the DESIR cohort fulfilling the ASAS criteria (ASAS+) and were compared with age- and sex-matched healthy controls. At baseline, ASAS+ patients (n = 443) and healthy controls (n = 79) did not differ in levels of most of the Th1, Th2 and Th17 cytokines except for IL-31, and sCD40L, which were significantly higher for ASAS+ patients than controls (p < 0.001 and p = 0.012, respectively). On multivariable analysis of ASAS+ patients, IL-31 level was associated with sCD40L level (p < 0.0001), modified Stoke AS Spine Score (mSASSS) < 1 (p = 0.035). The multivariable analyses showed that IL-31 was an independent factor associated with mSASSS < 1 (p = 0.001) and low bone mineral density (p = 0.01). Increased level of IL-31 might protect against structural damage but is also related to low BMD

Performance of the 2019 EULAR/ACR classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus in early disease, across sexes and ethnicities.

Funder: American College of Rheumatology Research and Education Foundation; FundRef: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000960Funder: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases; FundRef: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000069Funder: European League Against Rheumatism; FundRef: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100008741OBJECTIVES: The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2019 Classification Criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) have been validated with high sensitivity and specificity. We evaluated the performance of the new criteria with regard to disease duration, sex and race/ethnicity, and compared its performance against the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics (SLICC) 2012 and ACR 1982/1997 criteria. METHODS: Twenty-one SLE centres from 16 countries submitted SLE cases and mimicking controls to form the validation cohort. The sensitivity and specificity of the EULAR/ACR 2019, SLICC 2012 and ACR 1982/1997 criteria were evaluated. RESULTS: The cohort consisted of female (n=1098), male (n=172), Asian (n=118), black (n=68), Hispanic (n=124) and white (n=941) patients; with an SLE duration of 1 to <3 years (n=196) and ≥5 years (n=879). Among patients with 1 to <3 years disease duration, the EULAR/ACR criteria had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria (97% vs 81%). The EULAR/ACR criteria performed well in men (sensitivity 93%, specificity 96%) and women (sensitivity 97%, specificity 94%). Among women, the EULAR/ACR criteria had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria (97% vs 83%) and better specificity than the SLICC criteria (94% vs 82%). Among white patients, the EULAR/ACR criteria had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria (95% vs 83%) and better specificity than the SLICC criteria (94% vs 83%). The EULAR/ACR criteria performed well among black patients (sensitivity of 98%, specificity 100%), and had better sensitivity than the ACR criteria among Hispanic patients (100% vs 86%) and Asian patients (97% vs 77%). CONCLUSIONS: The EULAR/ACR 2019 criteria perform well among patients with early disease, men, women, white, black, Hispanic and Asian patients. These criteria have superior sensitivity than the ACR criteria and/or superior specificity than the SLICC criteria across many subgroups

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

European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) SLE classification criteria item performance.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR)/American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 2019 classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus system showed high specificity, while attaining also high sensitivity. We hereby analysed the performance of the individual criteria items and their contribution to the overall performance of the criteria. METHODS: We combined the EULAR/ACR derivation and validation cohorts for a total of 1197 systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and n=1074 non-SLE patients with a variety of conditions mimicking SLE, such as other autoimmune diseases, and calculated the sensitivity and specificity for antinuclear antibodies (ANA) and the 23 specific criteria items. We also tested performance omitting the EULAR/ACR criteria attribution rule, which defines that items are only counted if not more likely explained by a cause other than SLE. RESULTS: Positive ANA, the new entry criterion, was 99.5% sensitive, but only 19.4% specific, against a non-SLE population that included other inflammatory rheumatic, infectious, malignant and metabolic diseases. The specific criteria items were highly variable in sensitivity (from 0.42% for delirium and 1.84% for psychosis to 75.6% for antibodies to double-stranded DNA), but their specificity was uniformly high, with low C3 or C4 (83.0%) and leucopenia 80% for all items, explaining the higher overall specificity of the criteria set

Evidence-based evaluation and therapies

International audienc

Elaboration de critères d'évaluation dans les maladies systémiques (exemple du syndrome de Sjogren primitif)

PARIS7-Bibliothèque centrale (751132105) / SudocSudocFranceF