Engaging Multistakeholder Perspectives to Identify Patient-Centered Research Priorities Regarding Vaccine Uptake Among Adults With Autoimmune Conditions.

OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to prioritize topics for future patient-centered research to increase uptake of common vaccines, such as for pneumococcal pneumonia, influenza, herpes zoster, human papillomavirus, and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, among adults living with autoimmune conditions. METHODS: A steering committee (SC) was formed that included clinicians, patients, patient advocates, and researchers associated with rheumatic diseases (psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, vasculitis), inflammatory bowel disease, and multiple sclerosis. Through a scoping review and discussions, SC members identified research topics regarding vaccine uptake and/or hesitancy for prioritization. A larger multistakeholder alliance that included patients and patient advocates, clinicians, researchers, policy makers, regulators, and vaccine manufacturers conducted a modified Delphi exercise online with three rating rounds and one ranking round. Frequency analysis and comparisons across stakeholder groups were conducted. A weighted ranking score was generated for each item in the ranking round for final prioritization. RESULTS: Through the Delphi process, 33 research topics were identified, of which 13 topics were rated as critical by more than 70% of all stakeholders (n = 31). The two highest ranked critical topics per the full stakeholder group were "How well a vaccine works for adults with autoimmune conditions" and "How beliefs about vaccine safety affect vaccine uptake." CONCLUSION: A multistakeholder group identified key topics as critically important priorities for future research to decrease vaccine hesitancy and improve uptake of vaccines for adults with autoimmune conditions.

Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients Living With Vasculitis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the concerns and health-related behaviors in patients with vasculitis during the early phase of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in North America. METHODS: Patients with vasculitis in North America were invited to complete an online survey through the Vasculitis Patient-Powered Research Network in collaboration with the Vasculitis Foundation and the Relapsing Polychondritis Foundation. Questions focused on concerns and behaviors related to doctors' visits, tests, medication, and telehealth use. Factors affecting their concern and health-related behaviors were determined. RESULTS: Data from 662 patients were included: 90% of patients were White, 78% were women, 83% expressed moderate or high levels of concern about COVID-19, and 87% reported that their vasculitis moderately or extremely affected their level of concern. Older age, female sex, lung disease, and immunosuppression were associated with greater concern. Doctors' visits, laboratory tests, and other tests were avoided by 66%, 46%, and 40% of patients, respectively. Younger age, urban location, higher income, higher concern levels, and prednisone use (>10 mg/day) were associated with greater likelihood of avoiding visits or tests. Ten percent of patients on immunosuppressive therapy stopped their medication. Twenty-nine percent patients on rituximab avoided an infusion. Forty-four percent of patients had telehealth visits; more visits were reported for younger patients, for patients on glucocorticoids, and in Canada versus the United States. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with vasculitis have high levels of concern and exhibit potentially harmful health-related behaviors. Health care use varies across different demographic groups and geographic regions. Specific strategies are warranted to facilitate engagement of these patients with the health care system during the pandemic.

American College of Rheumatology Guidance for COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: Version 5.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the use of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: A task force was assembled that included 9 rheumatologists/immunologists, 2 infectious diseases specialists, and 2 public health physicians. After agreeing on scoping questions, an evidence report was created that summarized the published literature and publicly available data regarding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as literature for other vaccines in RMD patients. Task force members rated their agreement with draft consensus statements on a 9-point numerical scoring system, using a modified Delphi process and the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, with refinement and iteration over 2 sessions. Consensus was determined based on the distribution of ratings. RESULTS: Despite a paucity of direct evidence, statements were developed by the task force and agreed upon with consensus to provide guidance for use of the COVID-19 vaccines, including supplemental/booster dosing, in RMD patients and to offer recommendations regarding the use and timing of immunomodulatory therapies around the time of vaccination. CONCLUSION: These guidance statements are intended to provide direction to rheumatology health care providers on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate implementation of vaccination strategies for RMD patients.

Risk for Serious Infection With Low-Dose Glucocorticoids in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis : A Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose glucocorticoids are frequently used for the management of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other chronic conditions, but the safety of long-term use remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To quantify the risk for hospitalized infection with long-term use of low-dose glucocorticoids in patients with RA receiving stable disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) therapy. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Medicare claims data and Optum's deidentified Clinformatics Data Mart database from 2006 to 2015. PATIENTS: Adults with RA receiving a stable DMARD regimen for more than 6 months. MEASUREMENTS: Associations between glucocorticoid dose (none, ≤5 mg/d, >5 to 10 mg/d, and >10 mg/d) and hospitalized infection were evaluated using inverse probability-weighted analyses, with 1-year cumulative incidence predicted from weighted models. RESULTS: 247 297 observations were identified among 172 041 patients in Medicare and 58 279 observations among 44 118 patients in Optum. After 6 months of stable DMARD use, 47.1% of Medicare patients and 39.5% of Optum patients were receiving glucocorticoids. The 1-year cumulative incidence of hospitalized infection in Medicare patients not receiving glucocorticoids was 8.6% versus 11.0% (95% CI, 10.6% to 11.5%) for glucocorticoid dose of 5 mg or less per day, 14.4% (CI, 13.8% to 15.1%) for greater than 5 to 10 mg/d, and 17.7% (CI, 16.5% to 19.1%) for greater than 10 mg/d (all P < 0.001 vs. no glucocorticoids). The 1-year cumulative incidence of hospitalized infection in Optum patients not receiving glucocorticoids was 4.0% versus 5.2% (CI, 4.7% to 5.8%) for glucocorticoid dose of 5 mg or less per day, 8.1% (CI, 7.0% to 9.3%) for greater than 5 to 10 mg/d, and 10.6% (CI, 8.5% to 13.2%) for greater than 10 mg/d (all P < 0.001 vs. no glucocorticoids). LIMITATION: Potential for residual confounding and misclassification of glucocorticoid dose. CONCLUSION: In patients with RA receiving stable DMARD therapy, glucocorticoids were associated with a dose-dependent increase in the risk for serious infection, with small but significant risks even at doses of 5 mg or less per day. Clinicians should balance the benefits of low-dose glucocorticoids with this potential risk. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases.

Satisfaction with modes of telemedicine delivery during COVID-19: A randomized, single-blind, parallel group, noninferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about satisfaction with different modes of telemedicine delivery. The objective of this study was to determine whether patient satisfaction with phone-only was noninferior to video visits. METHODS: We conducted a parallel group, randomized (1:1), single-blind, noninferiority trial in multispecialty clinics at a tertiary academic medical center. Adults age ≥ 60 years or with Medicare/Medicaid insurance were eligible. Primary outcome was visit satisfaction rate (9 or 10 on a 0-10 satisfaction scale). Noninferiority was determined if satisfaction with phone-only (intervention) versus video visits (comparator) was no worse by a -15% prespecified noninferiority margin. We performed modified intent-to-treat (mITT) and per protocol analyses, after adjusting for age and insurance. RESULTS: 200 participants, 43% Black, 68% women completed surveys. Visit satisfaction rates were high. In the mITT analysis, phone-only visits were noninferior by an adjusted difference of 3.2% (95% CI, -7.6% to 14%). In the per protocol analysis, phone-only were noninferior by an adjusted difference of -4.1% (95% CI, -14.8% to 6.6%). The proportion of participants who indicated they preferred the same type of telemedicine visit as their next clinic visit were similar (30.2% vs 27.9% video vs phone-only, p = 0.78) and a majority said their medical concerns were addressed and would recommend a telemedicine visit. CONCLUSIONS: Among a group of diverse, established older or underserved patients, the satisfaction rate for phone-only was noninferior to video visits. These findings could impact practice and policies governing telemedicine.

American College of Rheumatology Guidance for COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: Version 4.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the use of COVID-19 vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: A task force was assembled that included 9 rheumatologists/immunologists, 2 infectious disease specialists, and 2 public health physicians. After agreeing on scoping questions, an evidence report was created that summarized the published literature and publicly available data regarding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as literature for other vaccines in RMD patients. Task force members rated their agreement with draft consensus statements on a 9-point numerical scoring system, using a modified Delphi process and the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, with refinement and iteration over 2 sessions. Consensus was determined based on the distribution of ratings. RESULTS: Despite a paucity of direct evidence, statements were developed by the task force and agreed upon with consensus to provide guidance for use of the COVID-19 vaccines, including supplemental/booster dosing, in RMD patients and to offer recommendations regarding the use and timing of immunomodulatory therapies around the time of vaccination. CONCLUSION: These guidance statements are intended to provide direction to rheumatology health care providers on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate implementation of vaccination strategies for RMD patients.

COVID-19 Update for the GRAPPA 2021 Annual Meeting: Focus on COVID-19 Vaccination.

The efficacy and safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with autoimmune inflammatory diseases (AIRDs) who are treated with immunomodulatory therapies was the focus of a symposium at the 2021 virtual annual meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA). The keynote address was delivered by Dr. Jeffrey Curtis, chair of the American College of Rheumatology COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Guidance task force, detailing what we do and do not know about vaccine efficacy and safety in patients with AIRDs and providing guidance about the need for modification of dosing in some immunomodulatory medications for optimal vaccine response. A consensus of the task force was that all patients with AIRDs should be vaccinated as soon as it is allowed in their respective locations, since the benefits of increased protection against COVID-19 infection outweigh the potential for vaccination reactions, including flares of underlying disease, or for reduced efficacy of vaccination because of disease state or medications. Key issues among patient research partners with psoriatic disease expressed in the premeeting survey and panel discussion/question-and-answer period included: vaccine efficacy and safety, the need to continue safe social habits and masking, how to assess efficacy of vaccination, how to deal with vaccine hesitancy among social contacts, medication management relative to vaccination, and concerns about the adequacy of ongoing telehealth visits vs the convenience of that technology.

EULAR recommendations for the management and vaccination of people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases in the context of SARS-CoV-2: the November 2021 update.

The first EULAR provisional recommendations on the management of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs) in the context of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), largely based on expert opinion, were published in June 2020. Since then, an unprecedented number of clinical studies have accrued in the literature. Several SARS-CoV-2 vaccines have been approved for population-wide vaccination programmes in EULAR-affiliated countries. Studies regarding vaccination of patients with (inflammatory) RMDs have released their first results or are underway.EULAR found it opportune to carefully review to what extent the initially consensus expert recommendations stood the test of time, by challenging them with the recently accumulated body of scientific evidence, and by incorporating evidence-based advice on SARS-CoV-2 vaccination. EULAR started a formal (first) update in January 2021, performed a systematic literature review according to EULAR's standard operating procedures and completed a set of updated overarching principles and recommendations in July 2021. Two points to consider were added in November 2021, because of recent developments pertaining to additional vaccination doses.

Medication Interruptions and Subsequent Disease Flares During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Longitudinal Online Study of Patients With Rheumatic Disease.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess trends in anxiety and interruptions in disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) use among patients with rheumatic diseases during the COVID-19 pandemic and to evaluate whether DMARD interruptions were associated with disease flares. METHODS: ArthritisPower, the Vasculitis Patient-Powered Research Network, and other patient organizations invited members to join a 52-week longitudinal study, with baseline surveys completed March 29 to June 30, 2020, with follow-up through May 2021. Logistic regression incorporating generalized estimating equations evaluated associations between interruptions in DMARD use and self-reported disease flares at the next survey, adjusting for demographic characteristics, medications, disease, and calendar time. RESULTS: Among 2,424 patients completing a median of 5 follow-up surveys, the mean age was 57 years, 87% were female, and the most common conditions were rheumatoid arthritis, vasculitis, and psoriatic arthritis. Average Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) anxiety T scores decreased from April 2020 (58.7) to May 2021 (53.7) (P < 0.001 for trend). Interruptions in DMARD use decreased from April (11.2%) to December 2020 (7.5%) (P < 0.001) but increased through May 2021 (14.0%) (P < 0.001). Interruptions in DMARD use were associated with a significant increase in severe flares (rated ≥6 of 10) at the next survey (12.9% versus 8.0% [odds ratio (OR) 1.71 (95% confidence interval [95% CI 1.23, 2.36]) although not any flare (OR 1.18 [95% CI 0.89, 1.58])]. CONCLUSION: Anxiety and interruptions in DMARD use initially decreased over time, but DMARD interruptions increased during 2021, possibly related to an increase in COVID-19 cases or vaccine availability. Interruptions in DMARD use were associated with increased rates of severe disease flares, highlighting the importance of avoiding unnecessary DMARD interruptions.

Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Patients With Autoimmune Conditions Treated With Systemic Therapies: A Population-based Study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe characteristics and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) clinical outcomes of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), or ulcerative colitis (UC) receiving systemic therapies vs the general population. METHODS: This descriptive retrospective cohort study used data from the United States Optum deidentified COVID-19 electronic health record dataset (2007-2020). Adults with COVID-19 were stratified into 3 disease cohorts (patients with RA, PsA, or UC who had received systemic therapy) and a comparator cohort not meeting these criteria. Incidence proportions of hospitalization and clinical manifestations of interest were calculated. Using logistic regression analyses, risk of endpoints was estimated, adjusting for demographics and demographics plus comorbidities. RESULTS: This analysis (February 1 to December 9, 2020) included 315,101 patients with COVID-19. Adjusting for demographics, COVID-19 patients with RA (n = 2306) had an increased risk of hospitalization (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.39-1.70) and in-hospital death (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.30-2.00) compared with the comparator cohort (n = 311,563). The increased risk was also observed when adjusted for demographics plus comorbidities (hospitalization OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.13-1.39 and in-hospital death OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.09-1.68]). The risk of hospitalization was lower in COVID-19 patients with RA receiving tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) vs non-TNFi biologics (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.20-0.53) and the comparator cohort (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.51-1.17). The risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 was similar between patients receiving tofacitinib and the comparator cohort. CONCLUSION: Compared with the comparator cohort, patients with RA were at a higher risk of more severe or critical COVID-19 and, except for non-TNFi biologics, systemic therapies did not further increase the risk. (ENCePP; registration no. EU PAS 35384).

Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Patients With Conditions Treated With Systemic Immunosuppressive Therapies: A Population-Based Study

Incidence proportions of hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, in-hospital death, all-cause mortality, and clinical manifestations of interest were calculated. Baseline Characteristics and IPs of Clinical Manifestations/Outcomes in the RA, PsA, UC, and Comparator Cohorts. a.At least 1 diagnosis of RA, PsA, or UC, and treatment with IM therapy (JAK inhibitor, TNFi, non-TNFi biologic, or csDMARD) within 2 yrs prior to SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis date;b.Absence of a diagnosis of RA, PsA, or UC, and no treatment with IM therapy within 2 yrs prior to SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis date;c.Baseline was defined as within 6 months prior to SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis date;d.csDMARDs included auranofin, aurothioglucose, azathioprine, chloroquine hydrochloride, chloroquine phosphate, cyclophosphamide, cyclosporine, gold sodium thiomalate, hydroxychloroquine sulfate, leflunomide, mercaptopurine, mesalamine, methotrexate, minocycline hydrochloride, n-acetylpenicillamine, penicillamine, primaquine, sulfasalazine, tacrolimus, and thalidomide;e.Within 90 days prior to SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis date;f.Denominator is the number of pts hospitalized within 30 days of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis;defined as death during hospitalization;g.Within 90 days of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis date;h.Within 30 days of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis date. ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome;CI, confidence interval;csDMARD, conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug;ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation;ICU, intensive care unit;IM, immunomodulatory;IP, incidence proportion;IV, intravenous;JAK, Janus kinase;N, number of pts in the cohort;n, number of pts in the specified category;PsA, psoriatic arthritis;pts, patients;RA, rheumatoid arthritis;TNFi, tumor necrosis factor inhibitor;UC, ulcerative colitis.

Impact of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs on vaccine immunogenicity in patients with inflammatory rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases.

Patients with rheumatic diseases are at increased risk of infectious complications; vaccinations are a critical component of their care. Disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs may reduce the immunogenicity of common vaccines. We will review here available data regarding the effect of these medications on influenza, pneumococcal, herpes zoster, SARS-CoV-2, hepatitis B, human papilloma virus and yellow fever vaccines. Rituximab has the most substantial impact on vaccine immunogenicity, which is most profound when vaccinations are given at shorter intervals after rituximab dosing. Methotrexate has less substantial effect but appears to adversely impact most vaccine immunogenicity. Abatacept likely decrease vaccine immunogenicity, although these studies are limited by the lack of adequate control groups. Janus kinase and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors decrease absolute antibody titres for many vaccines, but do not seem to significantly impact the proportions of patients achieving seroprotection. Other biologics (interleukin-6R (IL-6R), IL-12/IL-23 and IL-17 inhibitors) have little observed impact on vaccine immunogenicity. Data regarding the effect of these medications on the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine immunogenicity are just now emerging, and early glimpses appear similar to our experience with other vaccines. In this review, we summarise the most recent data regarding vaccine response and efficacy in this setting, particularly in light of current vaccination recommendations for immunocompromised patients.

American College of Rheumatology Guidance for COVID-19 Vaccination in Patients With Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases: Version 3.

OBJECTIVE: To provide guidance to rheumatology providers on the use of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs). METHODS: A task force was assembled that included 9 rheumatologists/immunologists, 2 infectious disease specialists, and 2 public health physicians. After agreeing on scoping questions, an evidence report was created that summarized the published literature and publicly available data regarding COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and safety, as well as literature for other vaccines in RMD patients. Task force members rated their agreement with draft consensus statements on a 9-point numerical scoring system, using a modified Delphi process and the RAND/University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, with refinement and iteration over 2 sessions. Consensus was determined based on the distribution of ratings. RESULTS: Despite a paucity of direct evidence, 74 draft guidance statements were developed by the task force and agreed upon with consensus to provide guidance for use of the COVID-19 vaccines in RMD patients and to offer recommendations regarding the use and timing of immunomodulatory therapies around the time of vaccination. CONCLUSION: These guidance statements, made in the context of limited clinical data, are intended to provide direction to rheumatology health care providers on how to best use COVID-19 vaccines and to facilitate implementation of vaccination strategies for RMD patients.

Effects of the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic on U.S. rheumatology outpatient care delivery and use of telemedicine: an analysis of data from the RISE registry.

The SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic resulted in major disruptions to medical care. We aimed to understand changes in outpatient care delivery and use of telemedicine in U.S. rheumatology practices during this period. Rheumatology Informatics System Effectiveness (RISE) is a national, EHR-enabled registry that passively collects data on all patients seen by participating practices. Included practices were required to have been participating in RISE from January 2019 through August 2020 (N = 213). We compared total visit counts and telemedicine visits during March-August 2020 to March-August 2019 and stratified by locations in states with shelter-in-place (SIP) orders. We assessed characteristics of patients within each practice, including primary rheumatic diagnosis and disease activity scores, where available. We included 213 practices with 945,160 patients. Overall, we found visit counts decreased by 10.9% (from 1,302,455 to 1,161,051) between March and August 2020 compared to 2019; this drop was most dramatic during the month of April (- 22.3%). Telemedicine visits increased from 0% to a mean of 12.1%. Practices in SIP states had more dramatic decreases in visits, (11.5% vs. 5.3%). We found no major differences in primary diagnoses or disease activity across the two periods. We detected a meaningful decrease in rheumatology visits in March-August 2020 during the SARS-CoV-2 global pandemic compared to the year prior with a concomitant increase in the use of telemedicine. Future work should address possible adverse consequences to patient outcomes due to decreased contact with clinicians.

Disruptions in Rheumatology Care and the Rise of Telehealth in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Community Practice-Based Network.

OBJECTIVE: The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on community-based rheumatology care and the use of telehealth is unclear. We undertook this study to investigate the impact of the pandemic on rheumatology care delivery in a large community practice-based network. METHODS: Using a community practice-based rheumatologist network, we examined trends in in-person versus telehealth visits versus canceled visits in 3 time periods: pre-COVID-19, COVID-19 transition (6 weeks beginning March 23, 2020), and post-COVID-19 transition (May-August). In the transition period, we compared patients who received in-person care versus telehealth visits versus those who cancelled all visits. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with canceled or telehealth visits. RESULTS: Pre-COVID-19, there were 7,075 visits/week among 60,002 unique rheumatology patients cared for by ~300 providers practicing in 92 offices. This number decreased substantially (24.6% reduction) during the COVID-19 transition period for in-person visits but rebounded to pre-COVID-19 levels during the post-COVID-19 transition. There were almost no telehealth visits pre-COVID-19, but telehealth increased substantially during the COVID-19 transition (41.4% of all follow-up visits) and slightly decreased during the post-COVID-19 transition (27.7% of visits). Older age, female sex, Black or Hispanic race/ethnicity, lower socioeconomic status, and rural residence were associated with a greater likelihood of canceling visits. Most factors were also associated with a lower likelihood of having telehealth versus in-office visits. Patients living further from the rheumatologists' office were more likely to use telehealth. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 led to large disruptions in rheumatology care; these disruptions were only partially offset by increases in telehealth use and disproportionately affected racial/ethnic minorities and patients with lower socioeconomic status. During the COVID-19 era, telehealth continues to be an important part of rheumatology practice, but disparities in access to care exist for some vulnerable groups.

Social Distancing, Health Care Disruptions, Telemedicine Use, and Treatment Interruption During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Patients With or Without Autoimmune Rheumatic Disease.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare concerns, social distancing, health care disruptions, and telemedicine use in patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease (ARD) and non-ARD and to evaluate factors associated with immunomodulatory medication interruptions. METHODS: Patients in a multistate community rheumatology practice network completed surveys from April 2020 to May 2020. Adults with common ARD (rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus) or non-ARD (gout, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis) were evaluated. Concerns about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), social distancing, health care disruptions, and telemedicine use were compared in patients with ARD versus non-ARD, adjusting for demographics, rural residence, and zipcode-based measures of socioeconomic status and COVID-19 activity. Factors associated with medication interruptions were assessed in patients with ARD. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 2319/36 193 (6.4%) patients with non-ARD and 6885/64 303 (10.7%) with ARD. Concerns about COVID-19 and social distancing behaviors were similar in both groups, although patients receiving a biologic or Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor reported greater concerns and were more likely to avoid friends/family, stores, or leaving the house. Patients with ARD were less likely to avoid office visits (45.2% vs. 51.0%, odds ratio [OR] 0.79 [0.70-0.89]) with similar telemedicine use. Immunomodulatory medications were stopped in 9.7% of patients with ARD, usually (86.9%) without a physician recommendation. Compared with patients with an office visit, the likelihood of stopping medication was higher for patients with a telemedicine visit (OR 1.54 [1.19-1.99]) but highest for patients with no visits (OR 2.26 [1.79-2.86]). CONCLUSION: Patients with ARD and non-ARD reported similar concerns about COVID-19 and similar social distancing behaviors. Missed office visits were strongly associated with interruptions in immunomodulatory medication.

Which patient-reported outcomes do rheumatology patients find important to track digitally? A real-world longitudinal study in ArthritisPower.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are increasingly used to track symptoms and to assess disease activity, quality of life, and treatment effectiveness. It is therefore important to understand which PROs patients with rheumatic and musculoskeletal disease consider most important to track for disease management. METHODS: Adult US patients within the ArthritisPower registry with ankylosing spondylitis, fibromyalgia syndrome, osteoarthritis, osteoporosis, psoriatic arthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus were invited to select between 3 and 10 PRO symptom measures they felt were important to digitally track for their condition via the ArthritisPower app. Over the next 3 months, participants (pts) were given the option to continue tracking their previously selected measures or to remove/add measures at 3 subsequent monthly time points (month [m] 1, m2, m3). At m3, pts prioritized up to 5 measures. Measures were rank-ordered, summed, and weighted based on pts rating to produce a summary score for each PRO measure. RESULTS: Among pts who completed initial selection of PRO assessments at baseline (N = 253), 140 pts confirmed or changed PRO selections across m1-3 within the specified monthly time window (28 days ± 7). PROs ranked as most important for tracking were PROMIS Fatigue, Physical Function, Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, Duration of Morning Joint Stiffness, and Sleep Disturbance. Patient's preferences regarding the importance of these PROs were stable over time. CONCLUSION: The symptoms that rheumatology patients prioritized for longitudinal tracking using a smartphone app were fatigue, physical function, pain, and morning joint stiffness.