ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Psoriatic arthritis (PsA) is a multi-system disease with a range of management options. Treatment may vary by geographic location. We compared disease characteristics and prescribing practices in the UK and Europe in the post-Covid era. Methods The ASSIST study was a cross-sectional observational study of PsA patients aged 18 years and older selected from 24 centres across 5 countries (UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain) between July 2021 and March 2022 (IRAS: 287039). Patients attending a face-to-face appointment with a diagnosis of PsA made by a rheumatologist were selected by systematic sampling at each centre and treated in routine clinical practice. Patient and disease characteristics, current treatment and treatment decisions (medications unchanged, switched, added or reduced) were recorded. The analysis was descriptive, with no imputation of missing data. Results 503 patients were included, with arthritis subtype, patient age, disease activity and duration shown (Table 1). Physician- and patient-reported disease severity was highest in the UK, where median patient age was lowest. Conventional synthetic (cs) DMARDS constituted a higher percentage of current PsA treatment in UK than continental Europe (66.4% vs 44.9%), whereas biologic use was more frequent in Europe (68.1% vs 36.4%). Adalimumab was the most commonly used biologic in the UK and Spain. Adalimumab and secukinumab were equally used in Germany, and ixekizumab and adalimumab were joint-first in Italy. Implementing change to the current PsA treatment was most common in the UK, predominantly being a treatment increase. This may reflect the higher level of disease activity or younger patient age in the UK than other countries, as treatment escalation is more likely earlier in the disease course. In the UK, treatment escalation was more commonly achieved by medication addition (26.2%) than medication switch (14%) or dose increase (7.5%). In Europe, medication addition and switch were of more similar frequency (10.9% vs 9.85%). Conclusion Disease characteristics and treatment strategies varied between countries, but particularly between UK and the rest of Europe. In contrast to mainland Europe, csDMARDs predominated in the UK, perhaps reflecting current NICE guidelines. Treatment escalation was most common in the UK, in keeping with higher disease activity. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The currently disseminating severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and limited capacities in outpatient rheumatological care, pose questions about possible alternatives to clinical visits, also in view of the digital revolution. It is unclear whether and to what extent patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases are willing and in a position to deal with the new media, such as video consultation. METHODS: In the middle of the pandemic in May 2020 outpatients were surveyed using a standardized questionnaire in order to document their possibilities and willingness to participate in a video consultation. The treating physicians were asked whether carrying out a video consultation was considered to be a possible and meaningful option. RESULTS: Overall, 232 patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases were surveyed (64.7% female, average age 54.0⯱ 15.2 years), seropositive (nâ¯= 58) and seronegative (nâ¯= 51) rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondyloarthritis (SpA, nâ¯= 77) including axial SpA (axSpA) and psoriatic arthropathy (PsA) as well as collagenosis and vasculitis (CoV, nâ¯= 46). The mean duration of disease was 5.5⯱ 8.2 years, whereby in 75 patients (32.3%) it was the first diagnosis. The mean disease activity (0-10, subjective patient self-estimation) was 4.7⯱ 2.5. Overall, 176 patients were basically aware of the possibility to carry out video consultations (75.9%) and 166 considered that they were technically capable to participate (71.6%) but only 131 were principally willing to participate (56.5%). Logistic regression analyses showed that the willingness to participate in video consultations decreased with increasing age (ßâ¯= 0.28, pâ¯= 0.01). According to the medical estimation video consultations were thought to be principally possible for 161 patients for technical reasons (69.4%) and for 127 for medical reasons (54.7%); however, a video consultation within the framework of treatment was only considered to be meaningful by the physician for 76 patients (32.8%). CONCLUSION: Not all patients can or want to participate in video consultations and the willingness declines with increasing age. The estimation of the meaningfulness of video consultations by physicians was also limited to approximately one third of the patients surveyed. This must be taken into consideration for the future planning of video consultations.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with chronic infammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) may be at increased risk of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).1 The quality of information obtained plays a crucial role for patients' decision to be vaccinated. Knowing patients' needs for information and which sources are used is important for the management of CIRD patients by rheumatologists and other physicians. Objectives: To identify main sources of information on SARS-CoV-2 used by patients with CIRD and to analyze their influence on opinions and willingness to be vaccinated. Methods: CIRD patients presenting to our tertiary rheumatology hospital were, after informed consent, consecutively included in the study once the vaccination campaign in Germany had started, to fll out a questionnaire. Next to sociode-mographic and disease-specifc data, vaccination willingness and knowledge regarding SARS-CoV-2 were assessed. Furthermore, patients' sources of information and their concerns about accuracy of information were evaluated. A numerical rating scale (NRS) ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 10 (completely agree) was used. Values between ≥7 were taken as positive answer. Nonparametric tests and multivariate linear regression analyses were performed. Results: In early 2021, a total of 514 patients were interviewed (Table 1). The majority (63.9 %) reported to be well-informed (NRS ≥7), whereas 18% had doubts regarding information on SARS-CoV-2. The most often used source of information was television, and only 8.6% reported to have been informed by a rheumatologist (Figure 1). About 20% of patients were no longer interested in receiving any information on SARS-CoV-2 through media. Information from rheumatologists, general practitioners, public health authorities or health related web sites did not reach 30.5% of patients. Of interest, 16% of subjectively well-informed patients were hesitant towards vaccination. As many as 43.6% of patients with doubts regarding information about SARS-CoV-2 indicated that they were not willing to be vaccinated. No source of information showed a strong correlation with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination willingness or with knowledge on SARS-CoV-2. Weak positive correlations were found between age and education level on the one hand and information sources about SARS-CoV-2 on the other hand. A weak negative correlation was found between doubts about information and health authorities, whereas positive correlations were found with social networks, friends and family. Conclusion: Most CIRD patients think that they are well-informed about SARS-CoV-2. However, their information rarely comes from expert-based sources and rarely from rheumatologists. Thus, there is an unmet need for CIRD patients to receive appropriate and comprehensive information about SARS-CoV-2, its infu-ence on rheumatic diseases, and about vaccination of patients with CIRD.
ABSTRACT
Background: Recent surveys in chronic infammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) showed a high degree of vaccine hesitancy. Current knowledge about patients' attitudes towards vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is limited. Objectives: To assess the willingness of CIRD patients to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and to identify influencing factors compared to non-CIRD patients. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, two cohorts of consecutively in parallel recruited patients with and without CIRD presenting to our tertiary hospital answered questions of a structured interview to assess vaccination willingness to SARS-CoV-2, experience with SARS-CoV2 in their environment and their personal history of infections and vaccinations. Vaccination willingness was assessed by a numerical rating scale (0: fully disagree;10: fully agree). Arbitrarily defned cut-offs were used to defne defnite (score ≥7) and probable willingness (scores of 5 or 6) to be vaccinated. Statistical analyses were performed with appropriate tests such as Kendall-tau b. Results: A total of 514 CIRD and 100 non-CIRD patients, mean age 54.7±12.8 and 55.6±9.8 years, were included. Defnite and probable willingness to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 was declared by 79.6% and 90.7% vs. 76.0% and 85.0% of CIRD and non-CIRD patients, respectively. Only 60% of CIRD patients believed that the vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 were safe, and 42% indicated to be afraid of side effects. Vaccination willingness correlated signifcantly with the degree of education, age, identifcation with a risk group for COVID-19 disease, hypertension, and the degree of information about preventable diseases. There was no correlation with the history of infections or with immunosuppressive therapy. Conclusion: Although our results show a high willingness for vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in both groups, there was quite some uncertainty regarding the safety and efficacy of the vaccines. Since major influencing factors were education and information about SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, patient education should be immediately improved.
ABSTRACT
Background: The interplay between humoral and cellular response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in patients (pts.) with autoimmune infammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRD) remains unknown. Objectives: To investigate the impact of different immunosuppressive therapies on the development of humoral and cellular immune responses to full 2-dose SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in AIRD pts. with stable low disease activity. Methods: The immune reactivity to COVID-19 vaccination was investigated in a prospectively recruited AIRD cohort with rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondy-loarthritis or psoriatic arthritis which received a therapy with IL-17i, TNFi, JAKi or MTX (alone or in combination). Almost all patients received mRNA-based vaccine, only 4 patients had a heterologous scheme. Anti-spike(S) antibodies(ab.) and sera neutralizing capacity (neutralization dilution 50;ND50) were measured 4 weeks after the frst (prime+4w) and 4 weeks after the second vaccination (boost+4w). Vaccine-specifc cellular immunity was evaluated by quantifying expression of activation markers on T cells as well as their production of key cytokines, at prime+4w and boost+4w. Results: Overall, a total of 92 pts. were included in the fnal cohort. 31 (33.7%) pts. were on TNFi, 24 (26.1%) on IL-17i, 24 (26.1%) on JAKi, each group encompassing pts. receiving drug inhibitors alone or in combination with MTX.13 (14.1%) were treated with MTX alone. The median time between the vaccination and blood sampling was 31 [IQR: 28-34] days after prime+4w and 28 [IRQ: 28-28] days after boost+4w. Although at prime+4w only 34/90 (37.8%) of pts. presented neutralizing ab., the majority (86/91, 94.5%), developed them at boost+4w. The highest neutralization titer developed the pts. on IL-17i both at prime+4w (74 [IQR: 13-91]) and boost+4w (798 [IQR: 511-1344]), while no statistically signifcant differences were found in the neutralization titer at boost+4w for the TNFi, JAKi, and MTX groups: 207 ND50 [IQR: 120-576], 319 [IQR: 133-461] and 749 [IQR: 264-1920], respectively. 81/90 (90.0%) pts. developed IgG ab. against SARS-CoV-2 S-protein at prime+4w and 91/92 (98.9%) at boost+4w. Pts. receiving IL-17i developed higher ab. titers (8295 U/mL [IQR: 4586-11,237]) compared to the other three groups: JAKi (4405 U/mL [IQR: 1436-7265], TNFi (2313 [IQR: 1156-3630] U/mL) and MTX (2010 U/mL [IQR: 693-9254]). Neutralization capacity correlated well with the titer of anti-S ab. at both timepoints. Co-administration of biologic/tsDMARDs and MTX led to lower titers compared to biologic/tsDMARDs mon-otherapy. All therapies left frequencies of CD154+CD137+ CD4+ T cells and CD137+ CD8+ T cells at prime+4w and boost+4w unchanged. Polyfunction-ality and T cell cytokine profiles across therapies did not signifcantly vary at boost+4w. Conclusion: Even after insufficient seroconversion for neutralizing capacity and ab. response against SARS-CoV-2 S-proteins between pts. of different mod of action agents, particularly for MTX and JAKi after frst vaccination, a second vaccination covered almost all pts. regardless of DMARDs therapy, with better outcomes in those on IL-17I. T cell immunity revealed similar frequencies of activated T cells in all modes of action after the second vaccination.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients with chronic infammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) remain underrepresented in receiving vaccinations despite being disproportionately affected by infectious complications. Objectives: To systematically review the literature regarding vaccination willingness and vaccination hesitancy in CIRD patients with focus on the perspective of patients and physicians. Methods: A scoping review was conducted in PUBMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library through 2021. Study selection was performed by two independent reviewers, data were extracted using a standardized form and risk of bias was assessed using instruments from the McMaster University. Identifed barriers and hurdles were synthesized by categorizing them into the WHO's Measuring Behavioural and Social Drivers of Vaccination (BeSD) conceptual model. Results: The search yielded 1,644 hits, of which 30 were included (cross-sectional studies (n=27) based on interviews and 3 intervention studies). The majority of studies reported barriers to infuenza and pneumococcal vaccination (n=11), or infuenza vaccination only (n=9) from the patients perspective. Two studies assessed the attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccinations. Only one study assessed the view of rheumatologists. Patients mainly mentioned behavioral and social factors that negatively influence their willingness to be vaccinated while physicians see defcits in the organization and lack of time as a major barrier. Coverage of domains matched to the BeSD model suggests a lack of awareness of infection risk by both patients and physicians (Figure 1). Conclusion: The view of vaccination in CIRD patients diverges between patients and rheumatologists. Our results show that in-depth counseling on vaccines is important for patients, whereas physicians need support in implementing specifc immunization recommendations. The themes identifed provide a starting point for future interventions to improve vaccine rates in CIRD patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Patients (pts.) with chronic infammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) are often not adequately protected against infectious diseases. As shown in an earlier study, less than 50% of CIRD pts. were vaccinated against pneumo-cocci and infuenza before the SARS-CoV2 pandemic started 1. High vaccination rates are critical to achieve herd immunity. Knowledge on barriers and facilitators of vaccine uptake in CIRD pts. is limited. Objectives: The aim of this study was to characterize barriers and facilitators towards vaccines in general and specifcally against pneumococci, infuenza and SARS-CoV-2 in adult CIRD pts. Methods: In early 2021, consecutive CIRD pts. completed a structured questionnaire including knowledge on vaccination, attitudes, and perceived barriers and facilitators towards vaccination. A total of 12 facilitators and 11 barriers towards vaccination was assessed in general, and specifcally for vaccination against pneumococci, infuenza and SARS-CoV2. The Likert scales had 4 response options, ranging from 1 (completely disagree) to 4 (completely agree). Patient and disease characteristics, their vaccination history and attitudes towards vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 were assessed. Results: Of 514 prospectively recruited pts., 441 responded (85.8%) to the questionnaire (table 1). Self-reported vaccine uptake was 48.8% against pneumococci and 66.2% against seasonal influenza. The majority (82.2%) was willing to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2. The majority (≥70%) had decent knowledge about vaccination, and only <10% doubted its effectiveness. The level of knowledge did not differ between the studied 3 vaccinations. Pts. were more likely to rate statements about facilitators favorably compared to statements about barriers. Facilitators for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination did not different from vaccination in general (Figure 1). Societal and organizational facilitators such as public vaccine campaigns or protection for high-risk pts. were more commonly named compared to inter-or intrapersonal facilitators. Protection of high-risk pts. was by far the most frequently cited facilitator. Most pts. indicated that they were likely to receive a vaccine if their health care professional would recommend it-without preference for GP or rheumatologist. The frequency of barriers was much lower compared to facilitators and more barriers towards SARS-CoV-2 vaccination were reported in comparison to vaccination in general or pneumococci and influenza, respectively. However, pts. frequently cited intrapersonal issues as barriers against vaccination. Importantly, the major barrier was an inadequate risk perception between the severity of COVID-19 and the potential adverse events of the vaccine. Conclusion: A relatively high number of pts. was vaccinated against pneumo-cocci and infuenza,-a probable campaign success during the last years. In addition, more than 80% of pts. were willing to be vaccinated against SARS-CoV2. Facilitators were of greater signifcance than barriers in this scenario. The high number of societal and organizational facilitators enables the implementation of effective strategies to increase future vaccination rates.
ABSTRACT
Background/Aims Secukinumab has demonstrated long-lasting efficacy and a favorable safety profile in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS). SERENA is an ongoing, longitudinal, observational study in>2900 patients with moderate to severe psoriasis, active PsA, and AS. We report interim data on impact of intermediate treatment interruption on secukinumab effectiveness in patients with active PsA or AS. Methods This analysis included data for 534 PsA and 470 AS patients enrolled in SERENA between Oct 2016 and Oct 2018 and followed-up for at least 2 years. Patients (≥18 years) with active PsA or AS were required to have received ≥16 weeks of secukinumab treatment before enrolment. Treatment interruption was defined as interruption of secukinumab therapy for at least 3 months between the last injection and re-initiation. Effectiveness assessments included swollen and tender joint count in PsA patients, and Patient Global Assessment (PtGA) and BASDAI score in AS patients before and during treatment interruption and post secukinumab re-initiation. Patients with assessments in≥2 of the time periods were included. Last assessment prior to intermediate treatment interruption was used as baseline. The assessment closest to 6 months after re-initiation was considered the post-secukinumab re-initiation assessment. Results A total of 31 (5.8%) PsA patients and 42 (8.9%) AS patients had an intermediate treatment interruption since initiation of secukinumab treatment. The mean (SD) duration of treatment interruption was 24.8 (16.4) and 26.4 (22.9) weeks for PsA and AS patients, respectively. The mean (SD) duration of secukinumab treatment before the treatment interruption was 86.8 (50.3) and 90.2 (46.9) weeks, and after the treatment interruption was 73.6 (44.4) and 63.2 (46.8) weeks. The most commonly reported reasons included adverse events (AEs;18 [58.1%] PsA, 19 [45.2%] AS), patient decision (3 [9.7%] PsA, 3 [7.1%] AS), and COVID-19 outbreak-related reasons (1 [3.2%] PsA, 6 [14.3%] AS patients). More than 80% of PsA patients and 76% of AS patients reinitiated secukinumab without a loading phase after the treatment interruption. The swollen and tender joint count increased in PsA patients from the last assessment prior to the treatment interruption (1.3 [1.0] and 7.2 [11.4];n=6) to the first assessment during the treatment interruption (4.0 [1.4] and 16.5 [19.1];n=2), and gradually decreased post secukinumab re-initiation (0.4 [0.5] and 2.0 [0.7];n=5). PtGA and BASDAI remained stable in AS patients from the last assessment prior to the treatment interruption to the first assessment during the treatment interruption and after secukinumab re-initiation. Conclusion Secukinumab intermediate treatment interruption occurred due to a variety of reasons in the real-world setting, mainly AEs and patient decision. Most patients re-initiated secukinumab treatment without a loading phase. No notable impact of the intermediate treatment interruption was observed on the effectiveness of secukinumab.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To study treatment decisions of patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) at the beginning of the SARS- CoV-2 pandemic in relation to disease characteristics with focus on anxiety. METHODS: A total of 970 CIRD patients diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), psoriasis arthritis (PsA) and connective tissue diseases (CTD), selected from our records who had presented to our hospital at least twice during last year, were contacted by telephone to be asked about medication changes, health status and therapy satisfaction. Standardised tools were used to assess disease activity, anxiety and depression, the latter by Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS) with a score >=8 denoting definite anxiety and/or depression. The cut-off for RADAI was set at >=3.2 and for BASDAI >=4. Compliance with prevention rules and vaccination status were assessed. RESULTS: Complete interviews of 557 patients (57.4%) made between April and July 2020 were available for analysis. The median age was 55 (47-63), disease duration 9.0 (4.5-17.0) years, 61.9% females. A recent change in medication was reported by 197 patients (35.4%), 51.2% of which admitted that this decision was mainly made due to the pandemic with more changes occurring with bDMARDs (21.8%) than cDMARDs (6.6%) and corticosteroids (5.4%). There was no major difference between patients who changed because of the pandemic or self-reported inactive disease versus patients who did not change therapy regarding disease activity, depression and anxiety (41%, 17.2%, 31.3% vs. 47.5%, 22.5%, 35.0% vs. 48.9%, 27.7%, 34.1%). More than 90% of patients reported that they rigorously followed Corona prevention rules. The majority of patients were vaccinated against influenza (55.3%) and pneumococci (61.3%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety, depression and disease activity did not play an important role in decisions favouring change of therapy, even though many patients changed medication due to the pandemic. Patients probably protected themselves by strictly adhering to hygiene recommendations. Vaccination rates against influenza and pneumococci were better than previously reported, but still too low.
ABSTRACT
Background: The best treatment options of patients with chronic inflammatory rheumatic diseases (CIRD) in the pandemic have not been completely clear, especially in the beginning of the lockdown. Whether and to which degree pandemic-related therapy changes have occurred, has not been studied in detail. Objectives: To study the behaviour of patients with CIRD initially facing the COVID 19 pandemic related to their disease status and medication. Methods: Patients with CIRD were contacted by telephone to assess their health status and ask for changes in medication. Standardized assessment tools were used to assess disease activity, depression and anxiety. High disease activity was assumed if RADAI-5 ≥ 3.2 and BASDAI ≥ 4. Anxiety (HADS-A) and depression (HADS-D) of patients were assessed using HADS. A score < 8 was taken as indication of no major problem in this regard. Results: A total of 886 patients was interviewed between April 15 and June 15 of 2020. Here we report on 550 patients with complete information on standard assessments (62%). About 60% were female, mean age 54.4±13.7, mean disease duration 12.2±10.5 years. Most had spondyloarthritis (SpA, n=287) including axial SpA (axSpA, n=172) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA, n=116), in total 52.2%, while 40.2% had rheumatoid arthritis (RA, n=221), and 7.6% connective tissue diseases (CTD, n=42). Most RA patients were on methotrexate (48.8%), while 43.8% took glucocorticoids. In addition, 61.0% of patients were on bDMARDs, mostly on TNF inhibitors (59.6%). More SpA than RA patients were on bDMARDs: 71.0% vs 49.7% respectively. A recent change in medication was reported by 182 patients (33.1%): 89 with RA (40.2%), 88 with SpA (30.6%) and 5 with CTD (11.9%). Half of those who changed (n=92;50.5%) admitted that the change was mainly made due to fear of the pandemic (16.7% of all patients). Altogether, significantly more patients changed bDMARDs (68.5%) than csDMARDs (57.3%). The data of patients who changed vs patients who didn't change is shown in the Table 1, including subgroup analyses. The median HADS scores were < 8. Conclusion: Two thirds of patients did not change medication but one third changed. A relatively high number of patients did so due to fear of the pandemic, mostly those on biologics. There were no major differences between RA and SpA. Anxiety and depression do not seem to play an important role for the decision to change medication (Table 1 below).