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

High fatigue scores in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a multigroup comparative study from the COVAD e-survey

Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) confer a significant risk of disability and poor quality of life, though fatigue, an important contributing factor, remains under-reported in these individuals. We aimed to compare and analyze differences in visual analog scale (VAS) scores (0–10 cm) for fatigue (VAS-F) in patients with IIMs, non-IIM systemic autoimmune diseases (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the data from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) international patient self-reported e-survey. The COVAD survey was circulated from December 2020 to August 2021, and details including demographics, COVID-19 history, vaccination details, SAID details, global health, and functional status were collected from adult patients having received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Fatigue experienced 1 week prior to survey completion was assessed using a single-item 10 cm VAS. Determinants of fatigue were analyzed in regression models. Six thousand nine hundred and eighty-eight respondents (mean age 43.8 years, 72% female; 55% White) were included in the analysis. The overall VAS-F score was 3 (IQR 1–6). Patients with IIMs had similar fatigue scores (5, IQR 3–7) to non-IIM SAIDs [5 (IQR 2–7)], but higher compared to HCs (2, IQR 1–5; P < 0.001), regardless of disease activity. In adjusted analysis, higher VAS-F scores were seen in females (reference female; coefficient −0.17; 95%CI −0.21 to −13; P < 0.001) and Caucasians (reference Caucasians; coefficient −0.22; 95%CI −0.30 to −0.14; P < 0.001 for Asians and coefficient −0.08; 95%CI −0.13 to 0.30; P = 0.003 for Hispanics) in our cohort. Our study found that patients with IIMs exhibit considerable fatigue, similar to other SAIDs and higher than healthy individuals. Women and Caucasians experience greater fatigue scores, allowing identification of stratified groups for optimized multidisciplinary care and improve outcomes such as quality of life

COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol

Vaccine hesitancy is considered a major barrier to achieving herd immunity against COVID-19. While multiple alternative and synergistic approaches including heterologous vaccination, booster doses, and antiviral drugs have been developed, equitable vaccine uptake remains the foremost strategy to manage pandemic. Although none of the currently approved vaccines are live-attenuated, several reports of disease flares, waning protection, and acute-onset syndromes have emerged as short-term adverse events after vaccination. Hence, scientific literature falls short when discussing potential long-term effects in vulnerable cohorts. The COVAD-2 survey follows on from the baseline COVAD-1 survey with the aim to collect patient-reported data on the long-term safety and tolerability of COVID-19 vaccines in immune modulation. The e-survey has been extensively pilot-tested and validated with translations into multiple languages. Anticipated results will help improve vaccination efforts and reduce the imminent risks of COVID-19 infection, especially in understudied vulnerable groups

Impaired health-related quality of life in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: a cross-sectional analysis from the COVAD-2 e-survey

Objectives To investigate health-related quality of life in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) compared with those with non-IIM autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and without autoimmune diseases (controls) using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) instrument data obtained from the second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) e-survey database. Methods Demographics, diagnosis, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments and PROMIS instrument data were analysed. Primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis. Results We analysed responses from 1582 IIM, 4700 non-IIM AIRD and 545 nrAID patients and 3675 controls gathered through 23 May 2022. The median GPH scores were the lowest in IIM and non-IIM AIRD patients {13 [interquartile range (IQR) 10–15] IIMs vs 13 [11–15] non-IIM AIRDs vs 15 [13–17] nrAIDs vs 17 [15–18] controls, P < 0.001}. The median GMH scores in IIM patients were also significantly lower compared with those without autoimmune diseases [13 (IQR 10–15) IIMs vs 15 (13–17) controls, P < 0.001]. Inclusion body myositis, comorbidities, active disease and glucocorticoid use were the determinants of lower GPH scores, whereas overlap myositis, interstitial lung disease, depression, active disease, lower PROMIS Physical Function 10a and higher PROMIS Fatigue 4a scores were associated with lower GMH scores in IIM patients. Conclusion Both physical and mental health are significantly impaired in IIM patients, particularly in those with comorbidities and increased fatigue, emphasizing the importance of patient-reported experiences and optimized multidisciplinary care to enhance well-being in people with IIMs

COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) survey protocol

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues to be a cause of unprecedented global morbidity and mortality. Whilst COVID-19 vaccination has emerged as the only tangible solution to reducing poor clinical outcomes, vaccine hesitancy continues to be an obstacle to achieving high levels of vaccine uptake. This represents particular risk to patients with autoimmune diseases, a group already at increased risk of hospitalization and poor clinical outcomes related to COVID-19 infection. Whilst there is a paucity of long-term safety and efficacy data of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with autoimmune diseases, the current evidence strongly suggests that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of adverse effects and disease flares. Herein, we report the protocol of the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study, an ongoing international collaborative study involving 29 countries and over 110 investigators

COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events among autoimmune disease patients: results from the COVAD study

Objectives. COVID-19 vaccines have been proven to be safe in the healthy population. However, gaps remain in the evidence of their safety in patients with systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs). COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events (AEs) in patients with SAIDs and healthy controls (HC) seven days post-vaccination were assessed in the COVAD study, a patient self-reported cross-sectional survey. Methods. The survey was circulated in early 2021 by &gt;110 collaborators (94 countries) to collect SAID details, COVID-19 vaccination details and 7-day vaccine AEs, irrespective of respondent vaccination status. Analysis was performed based on data distribution and variable type. Results. Ten thousand nine hundred respondents [median (interquartile range) age 42 (30–55) years, 74% females and 45% Caucasians] were analysed; 5867 patients (54%) with SAIDs were compared with 5033 HCs. Seventy-nine percent had minor and only 3% had major vaccine AEs requiring urgent medical attention (but not hospital admission) overall. Headache [SAIDs ¼ 26%, HCs ¼ 24%; odds ratio (OR) ¼ 1.1 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.3); P ¼ 0.014], abdominal pain [SAIDs ¼ 2.6%, HCs ¼ 1.4%; OR ¼ 1.5 (95% CI: 1.1, 2.3); P ¼ 0.011], and dizziness [SAIDs ¼ 6%, HCs ¼ 4%; OR ¼ 1.3 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.6); P ¼ 0.011], were slightly more frequent in SAIDs. Overall, major AEs [SAIDs ¼ 4%, HCs ¼ 2%; OR ¼ 1.9 (95% CI: 1.6, 2.2); P &lt; 0.001] and, specifically, throat closure [SAIDs ¼ 0.5%, HCs ¼ 0.3%; OR ¼ 5.7 (95% CI: 2.9, 11); P ¼ 0.010] were more frequent in SAIDs though absolute risk was small (0–4%). Major AEs and hospitalizations (&lt;2%) were comparable across vaccine types in SAIDs. Conclusion. Vaccination against COVID-19 is safe in SAID patients. SAIDs were at a higher risk of major AEs than HCs, though absolute risk was small. There are small differences in minor AEs between vaccine types in SAID patients