The Sound of Interconnectivity; The European Vasculitis Society 2022 Report

The first European Vasculitis Society (EUVAS) meeting report was published in 2017. Herein, we report on developments in the past 5 years which were greatly influenced by the pandemic. The adaptability to engage virtually, at this critical time in society, embodies the importance of networks and underscores the role of global collaborations. We outline state-of-the-art webinar topics, updates on developments in the last 5 years, and proposals for agendas going forward. A host of newly reported clinical trials is shaping practice on steroid minimization, maintenance strategies, and the role of newer therapies. To guide longer -term strategies, a longitudinal 10-year study investigating relapse, comorbidity, malignancy, and survival rates is at an advanced stage. Disease assessment studies are refining classification criteria to differentiate forms of vasculitis more fully. A large international validation study on the histologic classification of anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody (ANCA) glomerulonephritis, recruiting new multicenter sites and comparing results with the Kidney Risk Score, has been conducted. Eosinophilic granulomatosis with polyangiitis (EGPA) genomics offers potential pathogenic subset and therapeutic insights. Among bio-markers, ANCA testing is favoring immunoassay as the preferred method for diagnostic evaluation. Consolidated development of European registries is progressing with an integrated framework to analyze large clinical data sets on an unprecedented scale

Benefits of an expanded use of plasma exchange for anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis within a dedicated clinical service

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations for ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV) support its management within a dedicated clinical service. Therapies for AAV are imperfect with many patients failing to achieve disease control and others experiencing disease relapse. Plasma exchange (PEX) may be beneficial especially when the kidney is involved. METHODS: Within a new, dedicated service we retrospectively assessed, over a 6-year period, the benefits of PEX in two patient cohorts, discriminated by PEX treatment alone. Patients received PEX alongside standard of care if they fulfilled any of the following criteria: 1. serum creatinine >500 μmol/l or dialysis-requiring renal failure, 2. alveolar haemorrhage, 3. renal biopsy showing ≥30 % focal and necrotising lesions ± cellular crescents. Outcome measures included disease remission and relapse, cumulative immunosuppression, and morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Of 104 new patients, 58 patients received PEX at presentation, 46 did not. Cyclophosphamide and/or rituximab dosing was similar for both groups. Although patients receiving PEX had poorer renal function, a higher C-reactive protein and disease activity score at presentation disease remission rate was similar in both groups (no PEX vs. PEX: 96 % vs. 98 %). The PEX group entered remission quicker (no PEX vs. PEX: 3.9 ± 4.0 vs. 2.8 ± 1.3 months, p < 0.05), with a lower 3-month cumulative glucocorticoid dose (no PEX vs. PEX: 2.5 ± 0.4 vs. 2.3 ± 0.2 g, p < 0.001). Relapse was similar between groups but adverse events lower in the PEX group. CONCLUSIONS: PEX may be of benefit in AAV. Larger, longer randomised controlled trials are now needed. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0796-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users