IMPAIRED HEALTH-RELATED QUALITY OF LIFE IN PATIENTS WITH IDIOPATHIC INFLAMMATORY MYOPATHIES: A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS FROM AN INTERNATIONAL E-SURVEY

BackgroundComprehensive and large-scale assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) worldwide is lacking. The second COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD-2) study [1] is an international, multicentre, self-reported e-survey assessing several aspects of COVID-19 infection and vaccination as well as validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to outline patient experience in various autoimmune diseases (AIDs), with a particular focus on IIMs.ObjectivesTo investigate physical and mental health in a global cohort of IIM patients compared to those with non-IIM autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic AIDs (NRAIDs), and those without AIDs (controls), using Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) global health data obtained from the COVAD-2 survey.MethodsDemographics, AID diagnoses, comorbidities, disease activity, treatments, and PROMs were extracted from the COVAD-2 database. The primary outcomes were PROMIS Global Physical Health (GPH) and Global Mental Health (GMH) scores. Secondary outcomes included PROMIS physical function short form-10a (PROMIS PF-10a), pain visual analogue scale (VAS), and PROMIS Fatigue-4a scores. Each outcome was compared between IIMs, non-IIM AIRDs, NRAIDs, and controls. Factors affecting GPH and GMH scores in IIMs were identified using multivariable regression analysis.ResultsA total of 10,502 complete responses from 1582 IIMs, 4700 non-IIM AIRDs, 545 NRAIDs, and 3675 controls, which accrued as of May 2022, were analysed. Patients with IIMs were older [59±14 (IIMs) vs. 48±14 (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45±14 (NRAIDs) vs. 40±14 (controls) years, p<0.001] and more likely to be Caucasian [82.7% (IIMs) vs. 53.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 62.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 34.5% (controls), p<0.001]. Among IIMs, dermatomyositis (DM) and juvenile DM were the most common (31.4%), followed by inclusion body myositis (IBM) (24.9%). Patients with IIMs were more likely to have comorbidities [68.1% (IIMs) vs. 45.7% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 45.1% (NRAIDs) vs. 26.3% (controls), p<0.001] including mental disorders [33.4% (IIMs) vs. 28.2% (non-IIM AIRDs) vs. 28.4% (NRAIDs) vs. 17.9% (controls), p<0.001].GPH median scores were lower in IIMs compared to NRAIDs or controls [13 (interquartile range 10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (11–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 15 (13–17) NRAIDs vs. 17 (15–18) controls, p<0.001] and PROMIS PF-10a median scores were the lowest in IIMs [34 (25–43) IIMs vs. 40 (34–46) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 47 (40–50) NRAIDs vs. 49 (45–50) controls, p<0.001]. GMH median scores were lower in AIDs including IIMs compared to controls [13 (10–15) IIMs vs. 13 (10–15) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 13 (11–16) NRAIDs vs. 15 (13–17) controls, p<0.001]. Pain VAS median scores were higher in AIDs compared to controls [3 (1–5) IIMs vs. 4 (2–6) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 2 (0–4) NRAIDs vs. 0 (0–2) controls, p<0.001]. Of note, PROMIS Fatigue-4a median scores were the highest in IIMs [11 (8–14) IIMs vs. 8 (10–14) non-IIM AIRDs vs. 9 (7–13) NRAIDs vs. 7 (4–10) controls, p<0.001].Multivariable regression analysis in IIMs identified older age, male sex, IBM, comorbidities including hypertension and diabetes, active disease, glucocorticoid use, increased pain and fatigue as the independent factors for lower GPH scores, whereas coexistence of interstitial lung disease, mental disorders including anxiety disorder and depression, active disease, increased pain and fatigue were the independent factors for lower GMH scores.ConclusionBoth physical and mental health are significantly impaired in patients with IIMs compared to those with non-IIM AIDs or those without AIDs. Our results call for greater attention to patient-reported experience and comorbidities including mental disorders to provide targeted approaches and optimise global well-being in patients with IIMs.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, Sen P, Joshi M, et al. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int. 2022;42:2151–58.AcknowledgementsThe authors a e grateful to all respondents for completing the questionnaire. The authors also thank The Myositis Association, Myositis India, Myositis UK, the Myositis Global Network, Cure JM, Cure IBM, Sjögren's India Foundation, EULAR PARE for their contribution to the dissemination of the survey. Finally, the authors wish to thank all members of the COVAD study group for their invaluable role in the data collection.Disclosure of InterestsAkira Yoshida: None declared, Yuan Li: None declared, Vahed Maroufy: None declared, Masataka Kuwana Speakers bureau: Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie, Janssen, Astellas, Bayer, Asahi Kasei Pharma, Chugai, Eisai, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Nippon Shinyaku, Pfizer, Consultant of: Corbus, Mochida, Grant/research support from: Boehringer Ingelheim, Ono Pharmaceuticals, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Ashima Makol Consultant of: Boehringer-Ingelheim, Parikshit Sen: None declared, James B. Lilleker: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Sinan Kardes: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: CSL Limited, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Mrudula Joshi: None declared, Tamer A Gheita: None declared, Babur Salim: None declared, Tsvetelina Velikova: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Ioannis Parodis Grant/research support from: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Aurinia Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Elena Nikiphorou Speakers bureau: Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Consultant of: Celltrion, Pfizer, Sanofi, Gilead, Galapagos, AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Eli Lilly, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Arvind Nune: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Miguel A Saavedra Consultant of: AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo: None declared, Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, Johannes Knitza: None declared, Oliver Distler Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Medscape, Novartis, Consultant of: 4P-Pharma, AbbVie, Acceleron, Alcimed, Altavant, Amgen, AnaMar, Arxx, AstraZeneca, Baecon, Blade, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Corbus, CSL Behring, Galderma, Galapagos, Glenmark, Gossamer, iQvia, Horizon, Inventiva, Janssen, Kymera, Lupin, Medscape, Merck, Miltenyi Biotec, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Prometheus, Redxpharma, Roivant, Sanofi, Topadur, Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Kymera, Mitsubishi Tanabe, Novartis, Roche, Hector Chinoy Grant/research support from: Eli Lilly, UCB, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Consultant of: Mallinckrodt, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Bristol Myers-Squibb, EMD Serono, Kezar, Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Alexion, Argenx, Boehringer Ingelheim (BI), Corbus, Janssen, Kyverna, Roivant, Merck, Galapagos, Actigraph, Abbvie, Scipher, Horizontal Therapeutics, Teva, Biogen, Beigene, ANI Pharmaceutical, Nuvig, Capella, CabalettaBio, Grant/research support from: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Mallinckrodt, Janssen, Q32, EMD Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, Latika Gupta: None declared.

COMPARATIVE DISEASE BURDEN IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS, PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS OR ANKYLOSING SPONDYLITIS: DATA FROM COVAD PATIENT-REPORTED E-SURVEY

BackgroundRheumatoid arthritis (RA) and spondyloarthritis, including either Psoriatic Arthritis (PsA) and Ankylosing Spondylitis (AS), are some of the most diagnosed autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) in rheumatologists' routine clinical practice [1]. Understanding patients' health and functional status is crucial to provide personalized management strategies to optimize disease control and enhance the quality of life.ObjectivesWe aimed to compare disease burden in patients with RA, PsA or AS by assessing Patient-Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Health, Global Mental Health, Physical Function and Fatigue 4a together with VAS Pain.MethodsData were obtained in the international COVID vaccination in autoimmune rheumatic diseases study second e-survey (COVAD study). Demographics, AIRD diagnosis, disease activity, PROMIS Global Physical health, PROMIS Global Mental Health, PROMIS Physical Function SF10 and PROMIS Fatigue 4a score were extracted from the COVAD study database. For this study, we only included patients with self-reported RA or spondyloarthritis (either PsA or AS) undergoing active treatment with conventional synthetic disease-modifying drugs (DMARDs) and/or biologic DMARDs, who answered all the survey questions. Active disease was defined as the patient's perception of their disease as active in the four weeks before their first COVID-19 vaccine shot. Analysis of Variance with Bartlett's and Tukey's test was used to compare continuous variables between groups.ResultsFrom January to June 2022, n.1907 patients with RA, female 87.62% (1671/1907), with mean age (±SD) 50.95 ±13.67, n.311 patients with PsA, female 67.20% (209/311), with a mean age of 50.42 ±12.70, and n.336 patients with AS, male 51.31% (209/311), with a mean age of 43.13 ±12.75 years, responded to the COVAD e-survey.In those with active disease, neither physical health, global mental health, physical function, fatigue, nor pain were different among groups (Table 1, Figure 1). Patients with inactive AS had higher mean global physical health scores than RA patients (13.13 ±2.93 VS RA 12.48 ±2.90, p=0.01, Table 1). Those with inactive RA or PsA showed more severe fatigue (PsA 10.58 ±2.22, RA 10.45 ±4.08 VS 9.4 ±4.13, p =0.01 for both). Patients with inactive RA also reported poorer physical function and more residual pain than those with AS (37.79 ±8.86 VS 41.13 ±7.79, p<0.001;3.87 ±2.45 VS 3.34 ±2.39, p=0.01, respectively). Similarly, residual pain was perceived as higher in patients with inactive PsA than those with AS (4.04 ±2.50 VS 3.34 ±2.39, p=0.01)ConclusionDisease burden is roughly comparable in patients with active RA, PsA or AS. Patients with inactive RA and PsA suffer higher disease burden than those with inactive AS.Reference[1]Mease PJ, Liu M, Rebello S, Kang H, Yi E, Park Y, Greenberg JD. Comparative Disease Burden in Patients with Rheumatoid Arthritis, Psoriatic Arthritis, or Axial Spondyloarthritis: Data from Two Corrona Registries. Rheumatol Ther. 2019 Dec;6(4):529-542.Table 1.Patient-Reported Outcome Measures between groups.Inactive diseaseAS (n.185)PsA (n.179)RA (n.1167)MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDPROMIS Global Physical Health13.13*2.9512.433.2712.482.90p=0.01, VS RAPROMIS Global Mental Health13.313.3612.973.3312.843.17PROMIS Fatigue 4a9.44.1310.58*4.2210.45*4.08p=0.01, bothPROMIS Physical Function SF10 Score41.137.3939.279.0137.79*8.86p<0.001, VS ASVAS Pain3.342.394.04*2.503.87*2.45p=0.01, bothActive DiseaseAS (n.35)PsA (n.38)RA (n.189)MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDPROMIS Global Physical Health11.053.1910.102.7611.243.41PROMIS Global Mental Health11.313.2610.843.6311.893.30PROMIS Fatigue 4a12.944.8712.844.4211.754.68PROMIS Physical Function SF10 Score35.829.6233.528.7634.909.80VAS Pain4.682.775.02.544.682.61Figure 1.Violin plots showing kernel densities, quartiles and median for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for patients with RA, PsA and AS, stratified by disease activity status.[Figure omitted. See PDF]Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsVincenzo Venerito: None declared, Marc Fornaro: None declared, Florenzo Iannone: None declared, Lorenzo Cavagna: None declared, Masataka Kuwana: None declared, Vishwesh Agarwal: None declared, Naveen Ravichandran: None declared, Jessica Day Grant/research support from: JD has received research funding from CSL Limited., Mrudula Joshi: None declared, Sreoshy Saha: None declared, Syahrul Sazliyana Shaharir: None declared, Wanruchada Katchamart: None declared, Phonpen Akarawatcharangura Goo: None declared, Lisa Traboco: None declared, Yi-Ming Chen: None declared, Parikshit Sen: None declared, James B. Lilleker Speakers bureau: JBL has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Biogen. None is related to this manuscript., Consultant of: JBL has received speaker honoraria/participated in advisory boards for Sanofi Genzyme, Roche, and Biogen. None is related to this manuscript., Arvind Nune: None declared, John Pauling: None declared, Chris Wincup: None declared, Ai Lyn Tan Speakers bureau: ALT has received honoraria for advisory boards and speaking for Abbvie, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB., Nelly Ziade Speakers bureau: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees, and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, and Pierre Fabre;none are related to this manuscript, Grant/research support from: NZ has received speaker fees, advisory board fees, and research grants from Pfizer, Roche, Abbvie, Eli Lilly, NewBridge, Sanofi-Aventis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, and Pierre Fabre;none are related to this manuscript, Marcin Milchert: None declared, Abraham Edgar Gracia-Ramos: None declared, Carlo Vinicio Caballero: None declared, COVAD Study: None declared, Vikas Agarwal: None declared, Rohit Aggarwal Speakers bureau: RA has a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roivant., Grant/research support from: RA has a consultancy relationship with and/or has received research funding from the following companies: Bristol Myers-Squibb, Pfizer, Genentech, Octapharma, CSL Behring, Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca, Corbus, Kezar, Abbvie, Janssen, Alexion, Argenx, Q32, EMD-Serono, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Roivant., Latika Gupta: None declared.

BIOLOGIC TREATMENT SUSPENSION AND ASSOCIATED FACTORS IN PATIENTS WITH RHEUMATIC DISEASES DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: DATA FROM MEXICAN ADVERSE REGISTRY (BIOBADAMEX)

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic triggered serious challenges in the treatment of chronic diseases due to the lack of access to medical attention. Patients with rheumatic diseases (RD) must have adequate treatment compliance in order to reach and maintain remission or low activity of their diseases. Treatment suspension because of non-medical reasons might lead to disease activation and organ damage.ObjectivesIdentify the frequency of biologic treatment (bDMARD) suspension in patients with RD during the COVID-19 pandemic and determine the associated factors for suspension.MethodsIn this study we included all patients registered in the Mexican Biologics Adverse Events Registry (BIOBADAMEX), that started bDMARD before March 2019 and suspended treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used descriptive statistic to analyze baseline characteristics and main treatment suspension causes. We used Chi[2] and Kruskal Wallis tests to analyze differences between groups.ResultsA total of 832 patients patients registered in BIOBADAMEX were included in this study, 143 (17%) suspended bDMARD during the COVID-19 pandemic. The main causes of suspension were inefficacy in 54 (38%) patients, followed by other motives in 49 (34%) patients from which 7 (5%) was loss of medical coverage. Adverse events and loss of patients to follow up were the motive in 16 (11%) and 15 (11%) patients respectively.When we compared the group that suspended bDMARD with the non-suspenders (Table 1), we found statistical differences in patient gender, with 125 (87%) female patients that suspended bDMARD, with a median age of 52 (42-60) years, and a treatment duration of 3.8 years.ConclusionIn our study we found that 17% of patients with RD suspended bDMARD treatment during the COVID-19 pandemic and that non-medical motives such as lack of patients follow up and loss of medical coverage due to unemployment were important motives. These results are related to the effect of the pandemic on other chronic diseases.Table 1.Patients baseline characteristicsPatients that did not suspended bDMARD during pandemic (n = 689)Patients that suspended bDMARD during pandemic (n = 143)pFemale gender, n(%)549 (79.7)125 (87.4)0.02Age, median (IQR)55 (45 – 63)52 (42 – 60)0.04Body mass index, median (IQR)26.4 (23 – 30.4)27.23 (24.2 – 30.46)0.13Social security, n(%)589 (85.5)128 (89.5)0.2Diagnosis0.7- Rheumatoid arthritis444 (64.4)97 (67.8)- Juvenil idiopathic athritis29 (4.2)2 (1.4)- Ankyosing sponylitis93 (13.5)19 (13.3)- Psoriasic arthritis43 (6.2)6 (4.2)- Systemic lupus erithematosus32 (4.6)9 (6.3)- Others48 (6.9)10 (6.9)Disease duration, median (IQR)11 (7 – 19.5)12 (6 - 18)0.95Comorbidities, n(%)305 (44.3)73 (51)0.08Previos biologic, n(%)249 (36.1)60 (42)0.1Treatment at pandemic iniciation, n(%)0.8 - Etanercept a34 (4.9)5 (3.5)- Infliximab a24 (3.5)5 (3.5)- Adalimumab130 (18.9)22 (15.4)- Rituximab a61 (8.9)25 (17.5)- Abatacept76 (11)20 (14)- Tocilizumab82 (11.9)18 (12.6)- Certolizumab92 (13.4)28 (19.6)- Rituximab b7 (1)0- Golimumab36 (5.2)5 (3.5)- Tofacitinib14 (2)1 (0.7)- Infliximab b4 (0.5)2 (1.4)- Etanercept b31 (4.5)6 (4.2)- Baricitinib12 (1.7)1 (0.7)- Belimumab5 (0.7)1 (0.7)- Secukinumb8 (1.2)3 (2.1)Steroids use, n(%):254 (36.9)57 (39.9)0.2Steroids dose (mg), median (IQR)6 (5 – 10)6 (5 – 10)0.47DMARD use, n(%):538 (78.1)118 (82.5)0.1Treatment duration, median (IQR)5.06 (4.04 – 5.78)3.82 (3.35 – 4.95)0.001Suspension motive, n(%)NA- Inefficacy-54 (37.8)- Adverse event-16 (11.2)- Pregnancy-2 (1.4)- Loss of patient-15 (10.5)- Remission-7 (4.9)- Others-49 (34.2)Adverse events, n(%):102 (14.8)24 (16.8)0.3- Severe, n(%)13 (1.9)5 (3.5)0.4a original, b biosimilarREFERENCES:NIL.Acknowledgements:NIL.Disclosure of InterestsVijaya Rivera Teran: None declared, Daniel Xavier Xibille Friedmann: None declared, David Vega-Morales: None declared, Sandra Sicsik: None declared, Angel Castillo Ortiz: None declared, Fedra Irazoque-Palazuelos: None declared, Dafhne Miranda: None declared, Iris Jazmin Colunga-Pedraza: None declared, Julio Cesar Casasola: None declared, Omar Elo Muñoz-Monroy: None declared, Sandra Carrilo: None declared, Angélica Peña: None declared, Sergio Duran Barragan: None declared, Luis Francisco Valdés Corona: None declared, Estefanía Torres Valdéz: None declared, Azucena Ramos: None declared, Aleni Paz: None declared, ERICK ADRIAN ZAMORA-TEHOZOL: None declared, Deshire Alpizar-Rodriguez Employee of: Scientific Advisor in GSK México.

COVID-19 VACCINE SAFETY DURING PREGNANCY AND BREASTFEEDING IN WOMEN WITH AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES: RESULTS FROM THE COVAD STUDY

Background:COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) is often attributed to the fear of adverse events (AE) and disease flares (DF). No data are available regarding COVID-19 vaccine safety in this population.Objectives:We aimed at describing delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related AE (minor and major), DF, and related AID treatment modifications from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study.Methods:Among complete responses from 9201 participants as of June 21, 2022, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Six subgroups were identified upon diagnosis of AID vs healthy controls (HC) and their pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of any dose of vaccine (Figure 1).Figure 1.Flowchart of the study. AID: autoimmune diseases;HC: healthy controls;rAID: rheumatic AID;nrAID: non-rheumatic AID.[Figure omitted. See PDF]ResultsForty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding AID patients were identified and their vaccination rates (at least one dose) was 100% and 96.2%, respectively (Table 1). Overall AE, minor AE, and major AE were reported significantly more frequently by pregnant than non-pregnant patients (45% vs. 26%, p=0.01;40% vs. 25.9%, p=0.03;17.5% vs. 4.6%, p<0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC. Post-vaccination DF were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18% of age- and disease-matched control patients (n=2315). All DF in pregnant/breastfeeding patients were managed with glucocorticoids and a fifth of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressive treatment.Table 1.Characteristics of female subjects according to groups. Percentages in parenthesis. *Pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of the survey and/or at the time of at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine. Chi squared test: ~ p=0.01;° p=0.03;§ p<0.01.Total Women (n=6787)Group A Non-pregnant, non-breastfeeding with AID (n=4862)Group B Pregnant with AID* (n=40)Group C Breastfeeding with AID* (n=52)Group D Non-pregnant, non-breastfeeding HC (n=1749)Group E Pregnant HC* (n=31)Group F Breastfeeding HC* (n=53)Age (median, IQR)47, 35-5850, 38-6134, 31-35.2533, 30-3539, 29-4934, 30-36.533, 30-36Caucasian3225 (47.5)2634 (54.1)12 (30)22 (42.3)538 (30.8)7 (22.6)12 (22.6)No comorbidities3027 (44.6)1815 (37.3)19 (47.5)36 (69.2)1102 (63)17 (54.8)38 (71.7)Number of vaccinated women, n (%)6632 (97.7)4753 (97.8)40 (100)50 (96.2)1710 (97.8)30 (96.8)49 (92.5)≥3 doses4850 (71.5%)3583 (73.7%)26 (65%)33 (63.5%)1155 (66%)23 (74.2%)30 (56.6%)No AE4950 (74.6)3517 (74)~22 (55)~36 (72)1312 (76.7)22 (73.3)36 (73.5)Injection site (arm) pain and soreness630 (9.5)471 (9.9)7 (17.5)7 (14)138 (8.1)2 (6.7)5 (10.2)Minor AE1614 (24.3)1232 (25.9)°16 (40)°12 (24)338 (19.8)7 (23.3)10 (20.4)Major AE285 (4.3)196 (4.6)§7 (17.5)§1 (2)77 (4.5)1 (3.3)3 (6.1)Hospitalization74 (1.1)51 (1.1)2 (5)0 (0)20 (1.2)0 (0)1 (2)ConclusionThis study provides the first insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccination during the antenatal period in women with AID. While AEs were more commonly reported by pregnant patients with AID, these were no higher than among pregnant healthy controls without AID. These observations are reassuring, likely to strengthen physician-patient communication and overcome hesitancy as the benefits for the mother and fetus by passive immunization are likely to overweigh the potential risks of AE and DF.Reference[1]Fazal ZZ, et al;COVAD Study Group. COVAD survey 2 long-term outcomes: unmet need and protocol. Rheumatol Int 2022;42:2151-2158.AcknowledgementsThe authors are grateful to all respondents, to all patients support groups, and to all COVAD Study Group collaborators from 106 Countries.Disclosure of InterestsNone Declared.

Combination of digital technologies and active methodologies for historical learning

This study seeks to understand the potential of ICT, combined with active learning methodologies for the development of historical awareness and historical learning in 4th grade students of a public school in Portugal. This is a qualitative study, using a multiple case study, based on two realities: a 4th grade class (9-10 years old) and a 6th grade class (11-12 years old), as well as several techniques and instruments for data collection: questionnaire survey, focus group, participant observation, semi-structured interviews and works produced by the students. For the qualitative data analysis we used the analysis techniques of the Grounded Theory methodology, with the support of Nvivo software, and for the quantitative data we used descriptive statistics. Pedagogical interventions were designed to mobilize second order concepts, such as evidence, explanation, change/permanence in the elaboration of their historical ideas, through the use of some digital platforms. In this article we present the didactic intervention session related to the 1st activity of the project about the Black Death and Covid-19 in Portugal, implemented in the 1st cycle of basic education. Preliminary results allow us to conclude that the use of ICT by students in the proposed activities led to the development of their historical awareness, historical learning, as well as digital literacy. © 2023 AUFOP. All rights reserved.

Energy sovereignty, sustainable agriculture and climate change in Cuba: between public policies and civil society projects from 1959 to the pandemic stage

The search for solutions to global environmental change has been a concern of the Cuban State and government since the early years of the revolutionary process. Fact that is evidenced in the environmental projection, through the conception of public policies aimed at reversing its deterioration and promoting sustainable practices from the ecological, economic, social and cultural aspects, even in difficult contexts such as the well-known Special Period and the current pandemic generated by the Covid-19. The country's bets are not only made from a centralized and vertical approach, which respond to national and international scenarios and specific situations, but also through self-managed processes from civil society where horizontality and multi-actor dialogue prevail in in order to achieve a system based on social and environmental justice that articulates multiple institutions and collective subjects. The following work, from a qualitative and quantitative methodology, addresses the concrete impacts and the transformative capacity of the public policies outlined by the country, from the revolutionary triumph to the context of the pandemic in terms of energy sovereignty, sustainable agriculture and climate change. Analysis that is enriched with the visibility of projects created from civil society in pursuit of achieving the necessary eco-social transformation. Imbrication that provides an overview of the progress and challenges of public policies in conjunction with projects promoted by civil society in environmental matters, and has the novelty of interrelating processes aimed at reversing environmental conditions framed within dissimilar historical contexts, thus reflecting the broad struggle in the face of global environmental change within the revolutionary process.

Scale-free dynamics of COVID-19 in a Brazilian city.

A common basis to address the dynamics of directly transmitted infectious diseases, such as COVID-19, are compartmental (or SIR) models. SIR models typically assume homogenous population mixing, a simplification that is convenient but unrealistic. Here we validate an existing model of a scale-free fractal infection process using high-resolution data on COVID-19 spread in São Caetano, Brazil. We find that transmission can be described by a network in which each infectious individual has a small number of susceptible contacts, of the order of 2-5. This model parameter correlated tightly with physical distancing measured by mobile phone data, such that in periods of greater distancing the model recovered a lower average number of contacts, and vice versa. We show that the SIR model is a special case of our scale-free fractal process model in which the parameter that reflects population structure is set at unity, indicating homogeneous mixing. Our more general framework better explained the dynamics of COVID-19 in São Caetano, used fewer parameters than a standard SIR model and accounted for geographically localized clusters of disease. Our model requires further validation in other locations and with other directly transmitted infectious agents.

Epidemiological profile of SARS-COV-2 infection in pediatrics.

Objective: To describe the epidemiological and clinical profile of pediatric patients who were treated for suspected COVID-19 infecion, between March and October 2020, at the Hospital Universitario San Ignacio (HUSI), in Bogota, Colombia. Material(s) and Method(s): Cross-sectional design. Description of patients aged 1 month to 1 day before their 18th birthday, assessed between March and October 2020, who were approached by any pediatric care service of a university hospital for suspected COVID-infection. 19, according to current national and institutional protocols. Demographic variables and the reason for consultation of all individuals with suspected infection were recorded. Only when SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed were variables related to clinical aspects of the disease and its evolution recorded. Result(s): 920 medical records of pediatric patients with suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection were evaluated, of which there were 157 confirmed cases with COVID-19 infection. The main reason for consultation to suspect infection was fever in 50% of the cases. In patients with virological confirmation, 32.48% of the cases attended required hospital management. MIS-C was suspected in 5 patients who required intensive care unit management. In the evaluated period, there were no deaths associated with COVID-19 infection. Conclusion(s): SARS-CoV-2 infection is related in most cases to a spectrum of mild disease in the pediatric population. This study may be larger than pediatric patients presenting with gastrointestinal rather than respiratory symptoms, and the frequency of renal complications should be taken into account in patients in whom the systemic inflammatory syndrome associated with COVID-19 is suspected.Copyright © 2023 Asociacion Colombiana de Infectologia. All rights reserved.

Autoimmune multimorbidity and fatigue in women with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: an international, patient-reported, e-survey

Background: Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies are a group of rare systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases with substantial heterogeneity. We aimed to investigate gender differences in patient-reported outcomes and treatment regimens of people with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. Method(s): This international, patient-reported, e-survey was conducted worldwide. We used data from the COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) study, a large-scale, international, self-reported e-survey assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients older than 18 years with autoimmune rheumatic diseases, including idiopathic inflammatory myopathies. The COVAD study was conducted in more than 80 health-care centres, including hospitals, clinics, and universities located in more than 50 countries worldwide and on social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter. The COVAD e-survey was open between April 1, 2021, and Dec 31, 2021. We extracted survey data regarding demographics;autoimmune rheumatic disease diagnosis;autoimmune multimorbidity (three or more autoimmune rheumatic disease diagnoses for each patient);current corticosteroid or immunosuppressant use;and patient-reported outcomes, including fatigue and pain Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and PROMIS short form-physical function 10a (PF-10a). Gender was reported by participants with three options (men, women, or do not wish to disclose). Patient-reported outcomes and corticosteroid or immunosuppressant use were compared between men and women. Participants with inclusion body myositis were analysed separately due to the substantial difference in treatment and disease outcomes compared with other idiopathic inflammatory myopathy subtypes. Factors affecting each patient-reported outcome were determined using multivariable analysis. Finding(s): The survey data were extracted on Aug 31, 2021, and 1202 complete responses from participants with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies were analysed. Five patients who did not wish to disclose gender were excluded. 845 (70.6%) of the remaining 1197 were women. Women were younger than men (median 58 years [IQR 48-68] vs 69 years [58-75];p=0.00010). Autoimmune multimorbidity was more common in women than in men (94 [11.1%] of 845 vs 11 [3.1%] of 352;p<0.0001). Corticosteroid use was similar in men and women with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (except for inclusion body myositis), whereas the distribution of immunosuppressants was different, with higher hydroxychloroquine use in women (131 [18.3%] of 717 vs 11 [6.9%] of 159 in men;p=0.0082). The median fatigue VAS was significantly higher in women than in men (5 [IQR 3-7] vs 4 [2-6];p=0.0036), whereas the gender difference in pain VAS (median 3 [IQR 1-5] in women vs 2 [0-4] in men;p=0.064) and PROMIS PF-10a scores (38 [31-45] vs 39 [30-47];p=0.29) was non-significant. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and treatment in participants with inclusion body myositis. The multivariable analysis of idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (except for inclusion body myositis) revealed that female sex, residence in high-income countries, a diagnosis of overlap myositis, and autoimmune multimorbidity were independent risk factors for higher fatigue VAS. Interpretation(s): Women with Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies frequently have autoimmune multimorbidity and increased fatigue compared with men, calling for greater attention and further research on targeted treatment approaches. Funding(s): None.Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd

Multidisciplinary approach of the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients with severe bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia, are there differences depending on the respiratory therapy used during admission to intensive care?

OBJECTIVE: To describe the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients who required admission to Intensive Care for severe COVID 19 pneumonia and to analyze the differences between those who received therapy exclusively with high-flow oxygen therapy compared to those who required invasive mechanical ventilation. DESIGN: Cohort, prospective and observational study. SETTING: Post-intensive care multidisciplinary program. PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: Patients who survived admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe COVID 19 pneumonia from April 2020 to October 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Inclusion in the post-ICU multidisciplinary program. MAIN VARIABLES OF INTEREST: Motor, sensory, psychological/psychiatric, respiratory and nutritional sequelae after hospital admission. RESULTS: 104 patients were included. 48 patients received high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (ONAF) and 56 invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The main sequelae found were distal neuropathy (33.9% IMV vs 10.4% ONAF); brachial plexopathy (10.7% IMV vs 0% ONAF); decrease in grip strength: right hand 20.67kg (±8.27) in VMI vs 31.8kg (±11.59) in ONAF and left hand 19.39kg (±8.45) in VMI vs 30.26kg (±12.74) in ONAF; and limited muscle balance in the lower limbs (28.6% VMI vs 8.6% ONAF). The differences observed between both groups did not reach statistical significance in the multivariable study. CONCLUSIONS: The results obtained after the multivariate study suggest that there are no differences in the perceived physical sequelae one month after hospital discharge depending on the respiratory therapy used, whether it was high-flow nasal oxygen therapy or prolonged mechanical ventilation, although more studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions.

REAL-TIME FACE DETECTORS AND CLASSIFICATION PERFORMANCE IMPLEMENTING RESNET-50 MODEL FOR FACE MASK-WEARING CONDITIONS

The World Health Organization requires the community to wear a face mask to avoid transmission of COVID-19. The study investigates the performance of face detectors and evaluates the classification performance based on face mask-wearing conditions. The study built a total of 13,806 datasets that recorded an overall classification performance of 98%. The findings show that Multi-task Cascade Convolutional Neural Networks outperformed the other face detectors with an average score of 70% in accordance to distance, angles, occlusions, and multiple detections across given set conditions. Furthermore, the model recorded an accuracy performance of 83% for "correct wearing of face mask", 91% for "incorrect wearing of face mask", and 95% for "no face mask". However, despite the promising performance rates, the identified best face detector decreases when the given conditions are set to a higher level. To further improve and optimize the face mask-wearing conditions, the study highly recommends employing both statistical and mathematical analysis. © School of Engineering, Taylor's University.

All the President's Lies: How Brazilian News Media Addressed False and Inaccurate Claims in Their Titles

This paper examines how the Brazilian media covered false and misleading claims made by President Jair Bolsonaro in the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic. To do so, we extracted titles from 111 news articles connected to twenty-one disinformation episodes. The texts were published by six news organizations, and we classified them into three categories using content analysis: contextualization, correction, and reproduction. Among our findings, we have discovered that 60.36% of the content reproduced the president's discourse without acknowledging it was a lie or an error, while 26.13% presented elements of contextualization. Only 13.51% of titles corrected Bolsonaro's false or misleading claims. The results indicate that legacy and digital-native news organizations mostly failed to correct the Brazilian president's errors and lies, evoking questions about ethics and transparency. Consequentially, journalism may increase the noise in an already polluted and high-choice online media environment if such issues are left unaddressed. © 2023 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

Risk of in-Hospital Mortality Due to Covid19 in Patients with Bronchial Asthma: Application of 4c Mortality Scale

Role of asthma as a risk factor in severity and mortality in COVID-19 varies in literature. In 2020, 4CMortality score was published, which through 8 parameters in the initial evaluation (age, sex, comorbidity index Charlson, respiratory rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, renal function, Glasgow scale and C-reactive protein) stratified risk of in-hospital mortality from COVID-19 into low(0-3 points), intermediate(4-8), high(9-14) and very high(from 15). Our objective is to assess usefulness of 4CMortality in asthmatic patients admitted for COVID-19 and to verify the degree of correlation between the score and the mortality data and hospital stay. Observational retrospective study of asthmatic patients admitted for COVID-19 between March 2020 and March 2021. Statistical analysis is performed using Fisher's exact test(risk scale-death), ANOVA(risk scale-days hospitalization), and Kaplan Meier curve, considering statistically significant those results with a p<0.05. Sample of 99 patients, 18 in low risk group, 35 intermediate risk, 44 high risk and 2 very high risk. In terms of mortality, 7 deaths(high risk, 15.9%) and 2(very high risk, 100%), statistically significant (Fisher 17.07, p<0.0001). In terms of hospitalization days, median 7 days(low risk), 10(intermediate risk), 17 (high risk) and 5 (very high risk);statistically significant(F 6.37, p 0.001). In the survival analysis, median survival of 7 days(low-risk), 10(intermediate risk) and 19(high risk)(Log Rank 32.887, p<0.0001)(Fig 1). In conclusion, 4CMortality score is a good tool to establish the probability of poor evolution in asthmatic patients admitted for COVID-19 due to increased mortality and hospital stay.

‘The plural of silo is not ecosystem': Qualitative study on the role of innovation ecosystems in supporting ‘Internet of Things' applications in health and care

Background: Internet of Things (IoT) innovations such as wearables and sensors promise improved health outcomes and service efficiencies. Yet, most applications remain experimental with little routine use in health and care settings. We sought to examine the multiple interacting influences on IoT implementation, spread and scale-up, including the role of regional innovation ‘ecosystems' and the impact of the COVID-19 context. Methods: Qualitative study involving 20 participants with clinical, entrepreneurial and broader innovation experience in 18 in-depth interviews, focusing primarily on heart monitoring and assistive technology applications. Data analysis was informed by the NASSS (non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, sustainability) framework. Results: Interviewees discussed multiple tensions and trade-offs, including lack of organisational capacity for routine IoT use, limited ability to receive and interpret data, complex procurement and governance processes, and risk of health disparities and inequalities without system support and funding. Although the pandemic highlighted opportunities for IoT use, it was unclear whether these would be sustained, with framings of innovation as ‘disruption' coming at odds with immediate needs in healthcare settings. Even in an ‘ecosystem' with strong presence of academic and research institutions, support was viewed as limited, with impressions of siloed working, conflicting agendas, fragmentation and lack of collaboration opportunities. Conclusions: IoT development, implementation and roll-out require support from multiple ecosystem actors to be able to articulate a value proposition beyond experimental or small-scale applications. In contexts where clinical, academic and commercial worlds collide, sustained effort is needed to align needs, priorities and motives, and to strengthen potential for good value IoT innovation. © The Author(s) 2023.

[Multidisciplinary approach of the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients with severe bilateral COVID-19 pneumonia, are there differences depending on the respiratory therapy used during admission to intensive care?] / Valoración multidisciplinar de las secuelas al mes del alta hospitalaria por neumonía grave COVID-19, ¿existen diferencias en función de la terapia respiratoria empleada durante su ingreso en Cuidados Intensivos?

Objective: To describe the sequelae one month after hospital discharge in patients who required admission to intensive care for severe COVID-19 pneumonia and to analyze the differences between those who received therapy exclusively with high-flow oxygen therapy compared to those who required invasive mechanical ventilation. Design: Cohort, prospective and observational study. Setting: Post-intensive care multidisciplinary program. Patients or participants: Patients who survived admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) for severe COVID-19 pneumonia from April 2020 to October 2021. Interventions: Inclusion in the post-ICU multidisciplinary program. Main variables of interest: Motor, sensory, psychological/psychiatric, respiratory and nutritional sequelae after hospital admission. Results: One hundred and four patients were included. 48 patients received high-flow nasal oxygen therapy (ONAF) and 56 invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). The main sequelae found were distal neuropathy (33.9% IMV vs. 10.4% ONAF); brachial plexopathy (10.7% IMV vs. 0% ONAF); decrease in grip strength: right hand 20.67 kg (± 8.27) in VMI vs. 31.8 kg (± 11.59) in ONAF and left hand 19.39 kg (± 8.45) in VMI vs. 30.26 kg (± 12.74) in ONAF; and limited muscle balance in the lower limbs (28.6% VMI vs. 8.6% ONAF). The differences observed between both groups did not reach statistical significance in the multivariable study. Conclusions: The results obtained after the multivariate study suggest that there are no differences in the perceived physical sequelae one month after hospital discharge depending on the respiratory therapy used, whether it was high-flow nasal oxygen therapy or prolonged mechanical ventilation, although more studies are needed to be able to draw conclusions.

Autoimmune multimorbidity and higher fatigue VAS in women with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: Results from the international COVAD patient-reported e-survey

Background/Purpose: Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) are a group of rare systemic autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) with considerable heterogeneity. Little is reported about gender difference in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of those with IIMs, which have a significant impact on health-related quality of life. We aimed to investigate the gender difference in PROs and treatment regimens of IIM patients utilizing data obtained in the COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) study, a large-scale, international self-reported e-survey assessing the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in patients with various AIRDs including IIMs. Method(s): The COVAD study was launched in April 2021 and continued until December 31, 2021. The survey data regarding demographics, AIRD diagnosis, autoimmune multimorbidity (defined as three or more AIRD diagnoses for each patient), disease activity, current corticosteroid or immunosuppressant use, and PROs including fatigue and pain VAS, PROMIS Short Form -Physical Function 10a (PROMIS PF-10a), general health status, and ability to carry out routine activities were extracted from the COVAD database. Each PRO, disease activity, and treatments were compared between women and men. Patients with inclusion body myositis (IBM) were analyzed separately due to significant difference in treatment regimens and outcomes compared to other IIM subtypes. Factors affecting each PRO were determined by multivariable analysis. Result(s): 1197 complete responses from IIM patients as of August 2021 were analyzed. 845 (70.6%) patients were women. Women were younger (58 [48-68] vs. 69 [58-75] years old, median [interquartile range (IQR)], P0.001), and more likely to suffer from autoimmune multimorbidity compared to men (11.1% vs. 3.1%, P 0.001;Table 1). In patients with non-IBM IIMs, disease activity and corticosteroid use were comparable in both genders, while the distribution of immunosuppressant use was different (P = 0.002), with more hydroxychloroquine use in women (18.3% vs. 6.9%). The median fatigue VAS was significantly higher in women than in men (5 [IQR 3-7] vs. 4 [IQR 2-6], P = 0.004), whereas gender difference in the other PROs was not statistically significant (Table 2). In patients with IBM, on the other hand, no significant gender differences in PROs and treatment regimens were observed. The multivariable analysis in non-IBM IIMs revealed women, living in high-income countries, overlap myositis, and autoimmune multimorbidity as independent factors for higher fatigue VAS. Conclusion(s): Women with IIMs frequently suffer from autoimmune multimorbidity, and also experience more fatigue compared to men, calling for greater attention and further research on targeted treatment approaches. (Table Presented).

COVID19 vaccination-related short-term adverse events in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myositis and autoimmune multimorbidity: Results from the COVAD survey

Background: COVID-19 vaccines are safe & effective, though patients with rheumatic diseases like idiopathic inflammatory myositis (IIMs), and those with multiple comorbidities continue to be hesitant. Adverse events after vaccination are not extensively studied in those with multiple coexisting autoimmune diseases. Patients with IIM often have multiple autoimmune rheumatic and autoimmune non-rheumatic comorbidities (IIM-AIDs), with potentially increased risk of AEs. The COVAD study aimed to assess COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs till 7 days post-vaccination in IIM-AIDs compared to IIMs and healthy controls (HCs) group. Method(s): T he C OVAD s tudy g roup c omprised > 110 c ollaborators across 94 countries. The study was conducted from March-December 2021. A survey monkey platform-based self-reported online survey captured data related to COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs in IIMs, AIDs, and HCs. We compared COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs among IIM-AID patients and IIM alone and HCs, adjusting for age, gender, ethnicity, vaccine type, immunosuppression, and numbers of AIDs, using binary logistic regression. Statistically significant results following multivariate regression are reported. Result(s): Among 6099 participants, 1387 (22.7%) IIM, 4712 (77.2%) HC, 66.3% females, were included from 18 882 respondents: 573 (41.0%) people with IIM-AIDs;814 (59.0%) with IIM without other AIDs;and 4712 HCs. People with IIM were older [median 54 (45-66) IIM-AIDs, 64 (50-73) IIM, 34 (26-47) HC years, P < 0.001]. BNT162b2 (Pfizer) (37.5%) and ChAdOx1nCoV-19 (Oxford) (11.1%) were the most common vaccines. When compared to IIM alone, IIM-AID patients reported higher overall AEs [OR 1.5 (1.1-2.1)], minor AE [OR 1.5 (1.1-2.1)] &major AE [OR 3 (1.5-5.8)]. IIM-AIDs patients also reported higher body ache, nausea, headache, & fatigue (OR ranging 1.3-2.3). After adjusting for the number of AIDs, the major AEs equalized but overall AEs, & minor AEs, such as fatigue remained higher. When compared to HCs, IIM-AIDs patients reported similar overall AEs, minor AEs but higher major AEs [OR 2 (1.2-3.3)] nausea/ vomiting [OR 1.4 (1.01-2)], headache [OR 1.2 (1.01-1.6)], and fatigue [OR 1.3 (1.03-1.6)]. Dermatomyositis with AIDs (n = 183) reported higher major AEs [OR 4.3 (1.5-12)] compared to DM alone (n = 293). Active IIM with AIDs (n = 482) reported higher overall AEs [OR 1.5 (1.1-2.2)], minor AEs [OR 1.5 (1.1-2.2)] and major AEs [OR 2.6 (1.2-5.2)] compared to active IIM alone (n = 643). Conclusion(s): COVID-19 vaccination is safe with minimal to no risks of short-term AEs in patients with IIM without other concomitant autoimmune diseases. The presence of autoimmune multimorbidity conferred higher self-reported short-term risks of overall, major, and minor COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs 7 days post-vaccination, particularly in those with active IIM.

Vaccine hesitancy among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and rheumatic diseases patients in 2021-2022: Covad survey

Background: Patients with comorbidities and active rheumatic disease have increased morbidity and hospitalization following SARS-CoV- 2 infection. While vaccination has decreased this, many unknown factors still influence COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The data on predictors of vaccine hesitancy is regional and scarce. We aimed to analyze the factors influencing vaccine hesitancy in 2022 and compare them with those in 2021 through multicentre international e-surveys (The COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases Studies -COVAD study 1 and 2). Method(s): COVAD 1 and 2 are multi-centre international e-survey with 152 collaborators in 106 countries including patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM), autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), other autoimmune diseases (AIDs), and healthy controls (HCs) conducted in March-December 2021 and February-June 2022 (ongoing), respectively. Descriptive and multivariable regression adjusting for age, gender, ethnicity, and stratified by country of residence was performed. Result(s): Among the 18 882 (2021) and 7666 complete responses (2022), and 3109 (16.5%) and 387 (5.1%) did not receive any COVID-19 vaccine, respectively. The prevalence of vaccine hesitancy has decreased [OR 0.26 (0.24-0.3), P < 0.001]. Among the 387 vaccine non-recipients in 2022, numbers were as follows: IIM 69 (17%), AIRDs 179 (46%), other AIDs 80 (20.6%), and HC 59 (15%). The reasons for vaccine hesitancy in 2022 included: doctor advising against it 47 (12%), do not believe in the science behind the vaccine 79 (21%), long-term safety concerns 152 (39%), awaiting more safety data 105 (27%), and not recommended due to recent infection 30 (7%). Compared to AIRDs and HCs, IIM patients were more disbelievers of the science behind the vaccine [OR 1.8 (1.08-3.2), P = 0.023 AIRDs, OR 4 (1.9-8.1), P < 0.001 HC], had more long-term safety concerns [OR 1.9 (1.2-2.9), P = 0.001 AIRDs, OR 5.4 (3-9.6), P < 0.001 HC] and had more doctors recommending against the vaccine [OR 12.9 (2.8-59), P < 0.001 HC]. Vaccine non-recipients had higher pain visual analog score (VAS) (P < 0.001), lower fatigue VAS (P = 0.003), lower PROMIS10a physical health (P < 0.001), and mental health scores (P = 0.015). The factors predicting vaccine hesitancy in regression were lower PROMIS10a global physical health score [OR 0.9 (0.8-0.97), P = 0.014] and Caucasian ethnicity [OR 4.2 (1.7-10.3), P = 0.001]. Compared to 2021, doctor's advising against vaccination [OR 2.5 (1.8-3.6), P < 0.001] and long-term safety concerns [OR 3.6 (2.9-4.6), P < 0.001] were more frequent causes of vaccine hesitancy overall whereas vaccine non-availability [OR 0.05 (0.02-0.11), P < 0.001] and have scheduled the vaccination but not received [OR 0.1 (0.06-0.3), P < 0.001] were less frequent causes in 2022. Conclusion(s): Overall, the prevalence of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy has decreased. Long-term safety concerns and the need for more safety data are now the major reasons for vaccine hesitancy. Caucasian ethnicity and lower physical health scores are predictors of vaccine hesitancy. The increase in physicians recommending against vaccination calls for more physician awareness to mitigate vaccine hesitancy.

Science and Medicine

Given the exigencies of the Covid-19 pandemic, we have chosen to focus our review of science and medicine studies to feature works that speak to three core concerns that have emerged from this global and sociopolitical health crisis. The monographs that we explore here grapple with the following related questions: (1) How we understand, prepare for, and succeed or fail in preventing and responding to pandemics in a global economy;(2) How the origins of health epidemics and pandemics are imbricated in Western imperial violence and global capitalist structures;(3) How the development, circulation, and protocols of public health, health-care systems, and modern medicine have emerged in response to colonialism, global expansion, and their attendant environmental and health crises. Readers will note that both works reviewed here take as given the undeniable influence of colonial legacies on conceptions and treatments of disease. To our mind, these works are additionally remarkable in the ways that they foreground subjects and methods, whether non-Western or nonhuman animal, that are typically subordinated or historically neglected in studies of the history of medicine. © 2021 The English Association (2021) All rights reserved.

MODELLING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: VARIANTS AND VACCINES

In December 2019, a new coronavirus, the SARS-CoV-2, was detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan. Since then, many mathematical models have been developed to study the possible evolution of the COVID-19 disease and shed some light on the different biological processes of concern. On 14 December 2020, the United Kingdom reported a potentially more contagious and lethal variant of the virus, at the same time that different vaccines were being tested in order to prevent severe forms of the disease. In the following lines, we revisit a model proposed by our team, which took into account these two determining facts, showing its performance with real Italian data. © 2022, Scipedia S.L. All rights reserved.