Aberle, Judith H.

Aletaha, Daniel

Bonelli, Michael

Fritsch-Stork, Ruth

Haslacher, Helmuth

Heinz, Leonhard X.

Hofer, Philipp

Husar-Memmer, Emma

Koblischke, Maximilian

Kornek, Barbara

Mandl, Peter

Mayer, Margareta

Mrak, Daniel

Perkmann, Thomas

Radner, Helga

Redlich, Kurt

Sieghart, Daniela

Simader, Elisabeth

Smolen, Josef S.

Stiasny, Karin

Thalhammer, Renate

Tobudic, Selma

Winkler, Stefan

Zeitlinger, Markus

English

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia

 21Reumatizam 2021;68(Supl 1/Suppl 1):21–23https://doi.org/10.33004/reumatizam-supp-68-1-3SAŽETCI ABSTRACTSPOZVANA PREDAVANJA / INVITED LECTURES  USMENA PRIOPĆENJA / ORAL COMMUNICATIONSOnlInE rhEumATOlOgy rESEArCh And publIShIng  AmIdST ThE COVId-19 pAndEmICMrežno istraživanje i objavljivanje U reUMatologiji  U tijekU pandeMije Covid-19Olena Zimba1, Armen Yuri Gasparyan21Department of Internal Medicine No. 2, Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine  2 Departments of Rheumatology and Research and Development, Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust  (Teaching Trust of the University of Birmingham, UK), Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands, UKThe ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted all fields of scientific research. Rheumatology, as a rapidly devel-oping clinical discipline, has embraced positive trends in online research and offered some valuable survey data. Depending on target populations, their size, and geographic coverage, the obtained survey data may form a basis for rheumatology practice guidelines.The validity of online surveys is subjected to employing reliable channels for questionnaire dissemination and timeline of collecting responses. The strengths and limitations of online surveys share similarities with those of other observational studies. The reliability of the data change over time, necessitating revised surveys. Although full ethics review is not mandatory for most surveys, some precautions are warranted to preserve the anonymity of surveyees and avoid unjustified promotion of (repurposed) drugs amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.The EQUATOR Network endorsed the CHERRIES standard for online surveys. We have proposed a set of recom-mendations that concentrate on designing questions, validating questionnaires, disseminating questionnaires via social media, choosing advanced platforms for data processing, and targeting journals. Given the relatively low citations of surveys, most high-impact journals decline related submissions outright. Nonetheless, some influen-tial surveys, particularly those on COVID-19 vaccines for rheumatic patients, have been successfully published by top rheumatology journals.During the ongoing pandemic, several other types of online research have gained their momentum. Bibliometric and altmetric analyses of COVID-19 publications, including those in rheumatology, have revealed trends suc-cessful use of Twitter and Mendeley platforms for disseminating reliable information and ranking the most influ-ential topics. It is expected that more and more clinicians will embrace the benefits of online research for their daily practice.Keywords: COVID-19, rheumatology, questionnaire and surveys, bibliometric and altmetric analysesKljučne riječi: COVID-19, reumatologija, upitnik i ankete, bibliometrijske i altmetrijske analize22 Reumatizam 2021;68(Supl 1/Suppl 1):21–23Sažeci / Abstracts Pozvana predavanja – Usmena priopćenja / Invited lectures – Oral communicationsAddITIOnAl hETErOlOgOuS VErSuS hOmOlOgOuS bOOSTEr VACCInATIOn In ImmunOSupprESSEd pATIEnTS wIThOuT SArS-COV-2 AnTIbOdy SErOCOnVErSIOn AfTEr prImAry mrnA VACCInATIOn:  A rAndOmIzEd COnTrOllEd TrIAldodatno heterologno Cijepljenje U odnosU na hoMologno pojačano Cijepljenje U iMUnosUpriMiranih paCijenata  bez serokonverzije antitijela sars-Cov-2 nakon priMarnog Cijepljenja mrna: randoMizirano kontrolirano ispitivanjeMichael Bonelli#1, Daniel Mrak#1, Selma Tobudic2, Daniela Sieghart1, Maximilian Koblischke3, Peter Mandl1,  Barbara Kornek4, Elisabeth Simader1, Helga Radner1, Thomas Perkmann5, Helmuth Haslacher5, Margareta Mayer3,  Philipp Hofer6, Kurt Redlich7, Emma Husar-Memmer8, Ruth Fritsch-Stork8, Renate Thalhammer5, Karin Stiasny3,  Stefan Winkler2, Josef S. Smolen1, Judith H. Aberle3, Markus Zeitlinger9, Leonhard X. Heinz1 and Daniel Aletaha*1  #contributed equally1Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine III, Medical University of Vienna, Austria2 Division of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine I, Medical University of Vienna, Austria3Center for Virology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria4Department of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Austria5Department of Laboratory Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Austria6Department of Pathology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria72nd Department of Medicine, Hietzing Hospital, Vienna, Austria8 School of Medicine, Sigmund Freud University Vienna, Vienna, Austria; 1st Medical Department,  Hanusch Hospital of the Austrian Health Insurance Fund, Vienna, Austria; Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Osteology, Hanusch Hospital and AUVA Trauma Center Meidling, Vienna, Austria9Departement of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, AustriaObjectives. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)-induced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has led to exponentially rising mortality, particularly in immunosuppressed patients, who inade-quately respond to conventional COVID-19 vaccination.Methods. In this blinded randomized clinical trial we compare the efficacy and safety of an additional booster vac-cination with a vector versus mRNA vaccine in non-seroconverted patients. We assigned 60 patients under ritux-imab treatment, who did not seroconvert after their primary mRNA vaccination with either BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna), to receive a third dose, either using the same mRNA or the vector vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (Oxford-AstraZeneca). Patients were stratified according to the presence of peripheral B-cells. The primary efficacy endpoint was the difference in the SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroconversion rate between vector (heterologous) and mRNA (homologous) vaccinated patients by week four. Key secondary endpoints included the overall seroconversion and cellular immune response; safety was assessed at weeks one and four.Results. Seroconversion rates at week four were comparable between vector (6/27 patients, 22%) and mRNA (9/28, 32%) vaccine (p=0.6). Overall, 27% of patients seroconverted; specific T-cell responses were observed in 20/20 (100%) vector versus 13/16 (81%) mRNA vaccinated patients. Newly induced humoral and/or cellular responses occurred in 9/11 (82%) patients. No serious adverse events, related to immunization, were observed.Conclusions. This enhanced humoral and/or cellular immune response supports an additional booster vaccina-tion in non-seroconverted patients irrespective of a heterologous or homologous vaccination regimen.Trial registration: EudraCT 2021-002348-57Keywords: SARS-CoV-2, Rituximab, vaccination, immune responseKljučne riječi: SARS-CoV-2, rituksimab, cijepljenje, imunološki odgovorReumatizam 2021;68(Supl 1/Suppl 1):21–23 23Pozvana predavanja – Usmena priopćenja / Invited lectures – Oral communications Sažeci / AbstractshOw wE AdApTEd Our wOrK durIng ThE pAndEmIC.  wErE wE SuCCESSful?kako sMo prilagodili svoj rad tijekoM pandeMije.  jesMo li bili Uspješni?Matija TomšičUniversity Department for Rheumatology, Unuversity Clinical Centre Ljubljana, SloveniaCOnTrOVErSIES In ThE TrETAmEnT Of COVId-19 pATIEnTSkontroverze U zbrinjavanjU i liječenjU Covid-19 bolesnikaBruno BaršićSchool of Medicine University of Zagreb, University Hospital Dubrava, Zagreb, CroatiaSince we started to treat first COVID-19 patients and find out the gloomy perspectives of positive outcome, there was a desperate desire to improve survival by introducing new, “logical“ treatment options beside oxygenation, following the rapid elucidation of the pathogenesis of the disease. An intriguing option appeared that beside tar-geting SARS-CoV-2, modulation of devastating inflammatory response and supression of extensive coagulation might increase survival rates. Severe COVID-19 is usually bilateral pneumonia with characteristics of ARDS, multiorgan dysfunction and disseminated intravascular coagulation. These are characteristics of sepsis. The same pattern of thinking developed as over thirty years ago. The idea was that survival might be increased with early pathogen oriented therapy (remdesivir), neutralization of viral S antigen with monoclonal antibodies (bamla-nivimab, etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab), supression of inflamation with steroids (dexamethasone), supres-sion of the production and neutralisation of activity of proinlflammatory cytokines IL-6 (toculizumab, sari-lumab), IL-1 (anakinra), janus kinase (baricitinib, tofacitinib). Heparin and 5NOK inhibitors were used to supress and threat thrombosis. Unfortunately, in nineties we needed more than ten years to admit that only targeted antibacterial therapy, fluids, sympatomymetics, and in a selected group of patients hydrocortisone are of clinical importnace, while other antiinflamamtory therapeutic approaches were only the futile attemps. In Covid-19 pan-demic that became clear after only one year due to the huge number of patients.Our capabilities to supress viral replication by antiviral drugs (remdesivir) are still poor performing. Dexametha-sone (6 mg daily) improve outcome in patients who need oxygen. Prophylactic heparin doses are as effective as therapeutic, and 5NOK inhibitors might be useful in very selected group of patients with proven extensive throm-boses. Other therapeutic approaches are of little clinical significance. Intensive oxygen supplementation is needed. High-flow oxygenation became a standard therapy, but the outcome of mechanically ventilated patients is extremly poor, particularly in elderly. Early ECMO therapy is very useful but limited with low number of experi-enced and well equiped centers. Since pandemics continue these facts should be considered to prevent doing harm instead of helping severly ill patients.Key words: COVID-19, treatment, controversiesKljučne riječi: COVID-19, treatment, controversies

POZVANA PREDAVANJA / USMENA PRIOPĆENJA Dodatno heterologno cijepljenje u odnosu na homologno pojačano cijepljenje u imunosuprimiranih pacijenata bez serokonverzije antitijela SARS-CoV-2 nakon primarnog cijepljenja mRNA: randomizirano kontrolirano ispitivanje

POZVANA PREDAVANJA / USMENA PRIOPĆENJA Dodatno heterologno cijepljenje u odnosu na homologno pojačano cijepljenje u imunosuprimiranih pacijenata bez serokonverzije antitijela SARS-CoV-2 nakon primarnog cijepljenja mRNA: randomizirano kontrolirano ispitivanje

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia